Back
2011 (3) Supreme 684
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. Sathasivam and Dr. B.S. Chauhan, JJ.
O.P. Sharma & Ors. — Appellant(s)
versus
High Court of Punjab & Haryana — Respondent(s)
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1108-1115 of 2004
with
Criminal Appeal No. 1206 of 2004
Decided on : 9-5-2011
(2004) 5 SCC 26; (2000) 7 SCC 264; (1999) 1 SCC 37; (1998) 7 SCC 248; (1998) 4 SCC 577; (2003) 3 SCC 427; (1996) 5 SCC 216 – Relied upon
(b) Contempt of Courts Act – Section 12 – An advocate is a lawyer and an officer of the Court – He should always keep in mind hid dual responsibility and not abuse his position – However the Court cannot suspend his licence – This is prerogative of the Bar Council (Paras 20, 21)
(1995) 2 SCC 534 – Referred
(c) Contempt of Courts Act – Section 12 – Advocates adopting defiant attitude and casting aspersions having failed to persuade the Court to grant an order in the terms they expect may be held guilty of contempt of court. (Para 21)
(1995) 2 SCC 534; (1998) 4 SCC 409; (1991) 3 SCC 600 – Relied upon
(d) Contempt of Courts Act – Section 12 – Merely tendering apology would not purge the contempt (Para 23)
(1984) 3 SCC 405 – Relied upon
(e) Bar Council of India Rules – Section I, Chapter-II, Part VI – A deliberate attempt to scandalize the Court which would shake the confidence of the litigating public in the system and would cause a very serious damage to the name of the judiciary. (Para 26)
(1981) 3 SCC 166; AIR 1957 SC 250; (1955) 1 SCR 757; (1996) 7 SCC 99; (1991) 3 SCC 600 – Relied upon
(f) Contempt of Courts Act – Section 12(1) – In view of the unconditional apology and undertaking of maintaining good behaviour in future, the same accepted. (Para 28)
(g) Contempt of Courts Act – Section 12(1) – Considering the fact that the newspaper has merely published what had happened in the Court, unconditional apology of the owner, publisher, printer and Editor of ‘Majdur Morcha’ newspaper accepted. (Para 29)
Facts of the case:
This is a case of criminal contempt of court.
Finding of the Court:
Unconditional apology of all appellants accepted.
Result : Al appellants discharged of the contempt charge.
JUDGMENT
P. Sathasivam, J. —
1) Criminal Appeal Nos. 1108-1115 of 2004 are directed against the common judgment and final order dated 25.08.2004 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Crl. O.C.P. Nos. 18 and 25 of 1999, Crl. O.C.P. Nos. 3,4,5,18,19 and 20 of 2001 whereby the Division Bench after rejecting the claim of the appellants herein found all of them guilty of criminal contempt and convicted them under Section 12 read with Sections 15 and 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”)and sentenced them to various terms of simple imprisonment and fine. Feeling aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, one Surinder Sharma has filed Crl. A. No. 1206 of 2004. Since the issue in all these appeals is common and relate to one incident, they are being disposed of by the following judgment.
2) Brief facts:
(a) The District and Sessions Judge, Faridabad, by his letter dated 16.09.1999, addressed to the Registrar, High Court of Punjab & Haryana, forwarded Letter No. 376 dated 14.09.1999 written by Shri Rakesh Singh, Civil Judge (Junior Division-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class) Faridabad which was addressed to him. In the said letter, the Judicial Magistrate has stated that on 11.09.1999 at about 3 p.m., when he was dealing with the remand of accused Soran in FIR No. 136 dated 13.06.1999, under Sections 393/452/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “the IPC”) pertaining to Police Station Chhainsa, the Assistant Public Prosecutor requested him for remanding the accused to police custody. By that time, Mr. L.N. Prashar, Advocate, one of the contemnors/appellants herein, who represented the accused, opposed the request of police remand. After hearing the arguments, the Magistrate remanded the accused to police custody. When the order of police remand was not found favourable, Mr. L.N. Prashar, advocate became enraged and started hurling abuses and derogatory remarks against him. Upon hearing the remarks, he tried to pacify him and requested him to behave properly but he did not relent and again uttered unparliamentary words and also threatened him with dire consequences.
(b) It was further stated that the accused Soran was being produced in four criminal cases on that very day and was being represented by Mr. Prashar in all the matters. When he took another remand paper of the same accused, Mr. Prashar became furious and again uttered unparliamentary words and also threatened him. When he kept on sitting on the dias, Mr. Prashar called his fellow colleagues including Mr. O.P. Sharma, Rajinder Sharma, Surinder Sharma, Advocates, in total about 15-20 advocates, who all belonged to the same group. Then, he requested Mr. O.P. Sharma, who is a senior member of the Bar, to request Mr. Prashar to behave properly in the Court. However, Mr. O.P. Sharma sided with Mr. Prashar and along with other advocates shouted slogans and abused in filthy language and also threatened him.
(c) It was further stated that advocates were very aggressive and wanted to assault him physically. To avoid any further deterioration in the situation, he retired to his Chamber. One of his staff members, namely, Shri Raj Kumar, Ahlmad, had informed the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad and the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Faridabad about the incident and they came to his Chamber and they also overheard Mr. Prashar shouting in the Court. After sometime, Mr. O.P. Goyal, Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Faridabad came there and pacified the advocates.
(d) In continuation of his letter dated 14.09.1999, the Magistrate addressed another letter dated 24.09.1999 to the District Judge, Faridabad. In the said letter, it was stated that Mr. Prashar and Mr. O.P. Sharma, Advocates had criminal record and these persons have indulged in pressure tactics since long and highlighted all the details about them.
(e) The entire incident was published in a local newspaper ‘M
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
