An attachment order passed by the court in a contempt of court case continues to be in force until further orders are passed by the court, and it includes not merely the immovable properties but also the movable properties, including the amounts lying in the banks.

Headnote:
CONTEMPT OF COURT - ATTACHMENT OF BANK ACCOUNTS - DDA V. SKIPPER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (PVT) LTD & ANR. - SECTION 12(1)(O) OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 - ATTACHMENT OF BANK ACCOUNTS OF CONTEMPTORS AND THEIR RELATIVES - INTERPRETATION OF EARLIER ORDER - SCOPE OF ATTACHMENT - CONTINUING EFFECT OF ATTACHMENT UNTIL FURTHER ORDERS - RESTRAINT ON WITHDRAWALS AND TRANSACTIONS - SUBMISSION OF LIST OF BANK ACCOUNTS - CONDITIONS FOR PERMISSION TO OPERATE ACCOUNTS - REAL ESTATE BUSINESS - DISCLOSURE TO COURT - ARREST OF CONTEMPTOR - ACCESS TO RESIDENCE AND OFFICE FOR PREPARATION OF LIST OF BANK ACCOUNTS.
Fact of the Case:

In a contempt of court case, the court had earlier ordered the attachment of bank accounts of the contemnors, Tejwant Singh and his family members, as well as the bank accounts of the companies in which they were directors. The court was now considering whether the attachment order had ceased to be in force or was still continuing.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the attachment order was still in force and had been continuing since the date of the earlier order. The court found that the earlier order was categorical with regard to the attachment of the bank accounts of the contemnors and their relatives, and that there was no indication that the attachment had been lifted or vacated.
Issues: 1. Whether the attachment order passed earlier was still in force or had ceased to be in force? 2. Whether the attachment order included only immovable properties or also movable properties, including bank accounts?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted the earlier order and found that it was categorical with regard to the attachment of the bank accounts of the contemnors and their relatives. The court held that the attachment order was still in force and had been continuing since the date of the earlier order. 2. The court held that the word "properties" mentioned in the earlier order included not merely the immovable properties, but also the movable properties, including the amounts lying in the banks.
Final Decision: The court directed Tejwant Singh to file an affidavit listing out the various bank accounts in which he and his sons and their wives and of such of his daughters who were not married as on 6th May, 1996 and also the list of Bank accounts of the companies in which he -or any of the above persons were directors. The court also restrained Tejwant Singh, his sons and their wives, and daughters who were not married as on 6th May, 1996, from operating any of the Bank accounts.

JUDGMENT :

1. A detailed affidavit dated 2.11.99 has been filed by Mr. Prabjot Singh making serious allegations against the police officers. We have examined the affidavit and we are of the view that the details mentioned in the affidavit would call for a detailed affidavit from the police authorities and it is in this perspective, the learned senior counsel made a prayer to implead the various police officers who have been named in this affidavit so that appropriate notices can be issued. Upon hearing the submissions we do feel it expedient to grant liberty to Sri Prabjot Singh to file an application for impleadment of the Police Officers named in the affidavit.

2. According to the earlier orders passed by this Court which-have since been taken note of by the Delhi High Court, Mr. Prabjot Singh was reporting to the Crime Branch, Mehrauli. Today learned counsel has mentioned that it will be more convenient if the petitioner is permitted to report to the Police Station at Tilak Marg, New Delhi. After hearing counsel for the Delhi Administration who is instructed by the concerned Police Officer, Mr. Harmeet Singh (who is present in Court) it is agreed that instead of the petitioner's reporting at Crime Branch, Mehrauli, Mr. Prabjot Singh could report at the Police Station, Tilak Marg, New Delhi on every Tuesday and Friday at 5.00 p.m. The order of the Delhi High Court will stand modified accordingly.

3. A copy of this order may be communicated to the Delhi High Court.

4. On 28.10.99, this Court passed an order directing issuance of an order of attachment of bank accounts of Prabjot Singh and also directing him to furnish a list of his bank accounts. Learned senior counsel Sri R.K. Jain, today has filed before this Court an affidavit of his client dated 2.11.99 and in pars 16 of that affidavit a list of the bank accounts held by Probjot Singh as well as his wife, Smt. Madhu Sabharwal, is furnished.,

5. Notice will issue to all these banks mentioned in the aforesaid affidavit. The above said Banks are hereby restrained from allowing Sri Prabjot Singh and his wife from withdrawing any amounts from these accounts.

6. It will, however, be open to Sri Prabiot Singh or his wife to disclose to this Court the nature of the business in real estate which they would like to undertake or continue, so that this Court could consider granting permission subject to such conditions as this Court may impose. Both of them are further restrained from entering into any transactions in regard to the properties which are under attachment as per the earlier orders of this Court. No fresh transaction will be entered into by them without the previous permission of this Court.

7. The above said Banks are hereby directed to file a Statement of Accounts as operated by the above-said persons during the last five years. The statement will have to be submitted to this Court within four weeks from today. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the banks mentioned in para 16 of the affidavit of Sri Prabjot Singh. Sri Prabjot Singh is directed to furnish the addresses of the banks mentioned in para 16 of the affidavit. The addresses will be filed within three days from today.

8. The next question relates to the attachment of the bank accounts of Tejwant Singh, his sons and their wives and also of such of his daughters who were not married by 6th May, 1996 when this Court passed judgment in DDA v. Skipper Construction Company (Pvt) Ltd & Anr., (1996 (4) SCC 622). We find from para 3 of the above said judgment a reference to an earlier order of this Court. In para 2, wherein it was directed as follows :-

"All the properties and the bank accounts standing in the name of the contemnors and Directors of Skipper Construction Company (Pvt.) Ltd. and their wives, sons and unmarried daughters will stand attached".

9. In our view, the above order is categorical with regard to the attachment of the bank accounts of the persons stated therein. Prima facie, it appea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1999 Supreme(SC) 1635

An attachment order passed by the court in a contempt of court case continues to be in force until further orders are passed by the court, and it includes not merely the immovable properties but also the movable properties, including the amounts lying in the banks.

Cases Referred (1)