SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
UDAY UMESH LALIT, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.
State Bank of India and Others – Petitioners
Versus
Dr. Vijay Mallya – Respondent
Conmt. Pet. (C) No. 421-424 of 2016, SLP (C) No. 6828-6831 of 2016
Decided On : 11-07-2022
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Section 12 – Contempt of Court – Punishment – Considering facts and circumstances on record and facts that Contemnor never showed any remorse nor tendered any apology for his conduct, sentence of four months and fine in sum of Rs. 2,000/- imposed upon Contemnor – Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, directed to secure presence of Contemnor to undergo imprisonment imposed upon him – Government of India including Ministry of External Affairs and all other agencies or instrumentalities shall carry out directions issued by Apex Court with due diligence and utmost expediency – Compliance Report shall thereafter be filed in Registry of this Court. (Paras 1 and 2)
Result : Contempt Petitions disposed of.
ORDER :
1. The Contempt Petitions are disposed of in terms of the signed reportable Order. Relevant portion of the Order is quoted hereunder:
16. Considering the facts and circumstances on record and the facts that the Contemnor never showed any remorse nor tendered any apology for his conduct, we impose sentence of four months and fine in the sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand Only) upon the Contemnor. The fine shall be deposited in the Registry of this Court within four weeks and upon such deposit, the amount shall be made over to the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. In case the amount of fine is not deposited within the time stipulated, the Contemnor shall undergo further sentence of two months.
We direct the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi to secure the presence of the Contemnor to undergo the imprisonment imposed upon him. Needless to say, Government of India including the Ministry of External Affairs and all other agencies or instrumentalities shall carry out the directions issued by this Court with due diligence and utmost expediency. A Compliance Report shall thereafter be filed in the Registry of this Court.
17. We also direct:
(A) The transactions referred to in the Judgment and Order dated 09.05.2017 in terms of which the amount of US$ 40 million was disbursed to the beneficiaries detailed in paragraph 16 of the said judgment and order is held to be void and inoperative.
(B) The Contemnor and the beneficiaries under said transactions referred to in the said Paragraph 16 shall be bound to deposit the amount received by such beneficiaries along with interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum with the concerned Recovery Officer within four weeks.
(C) In case the amounts are not so deposited, the concerned Recovery Officer shall be entitled to take appropriate proceedings for recovery of said amounts and Government of India and all the concerned agencies shall extend assistance and complete cooperation. It shall be open to take such appropriate steps including the appointment of Forensic Auditors.
18. In the end, we must express our sincere gratitude and appreciation for the efforts put in by Mr. Jaideep Gupta, learned Senior Advocate who assisted this Court very ably as Amicus Curiae.
19. These contempt petitions, thus, stand disposed of.”
2. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Contempt of Court – Contemnor who never showed any remorse nor tendered any apology for his conduct, is bound to suffer consequences of his contemptuous conduct.
The decision emphasizes the necessity of special justification for imposing imprisonment as a punishment for civil contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act.
Civil contempt is established when a party willfully disobeys a Court order, emphasizing the importance of compliance in maintaining judicial authority.
The court confirmed partial compliance with prior orders and established a timeline for further actions regarding contempt proceedings.
The judgment emphasized the need for a clear case of wilful disobedience to the Court's order before exercising the jurisdiction to punish for contempt.
The court upheld the protocol of financial release in compliance with its previous orders, allowing for future claims.
Court's authority to enforce compliance with previous orders and implications of non-compliance.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.