SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(SC) 667

A.M.AHMADI, K.RAMASWAMY
Mohd. Zahir Khan – Appellant
Versus
Vijai Singh – Respondent


ORDER

When the,above miscellaneous application was called on for hearing today, after hearing the petitioner we were inclined to think that since the earlier order dated 16th August, 1991 was passed by a Division Bench comprising our learned brothers S. Ratnavel Pandian and K. Jayachandra Reddy, JJ. It would be more appropriate that this miscellaneous application also be placed before a Bench of which either of them is a party. Just when we had dictated this part of the order that the petitioner addressed the Court in a loud tones; "either he is an anti-national or the Judges are antinationals". He continued to make similar contemptuous statements scandalising the Court and, therefore, we were constrained to direct notice to issue against him for committing contempt. We, therefore, directed notice to be served on the petitioner forthwith to show cause why action for Contempt of Court should not be taken against him. We directed the Registry to forthwith serve the show cause notice on him and further directed that the matter be called out at 12.45 p. m. We also directed the petitioner not to leave the Court and he was present in Court when the notice was served on him. The learned At











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top