JUDGMENT - BOBDE S.A., J.:---Heard Shri Ramesh Darda, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Shri Khubalkar, learned A.G.P. for the State.

2.This is an application for setting aside the earlier order of this Court by which this Court dropped the contempt proceedings initiated at the instance of the petitioner against the respondent-Secretary, Ministry of Co-operation, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya.

3.The petitioner had alleged in the contempt proceedings that the respondents are guilty of disobedience of the order of this Court in that the respondent has not complied with the order of this Court dated 3rd September, 1999 in Writ Petition No. 1488 of 1999 directing the respondent to hear the petitioner and then decide the matter. The contempt with which the respondent was charged for civil contempt as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act. The definition reads as follows:--

"2(b) "civil contempt" means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a Court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a Court."

4.The petitioner, who had moved this Court for taking action under the Contempt of Courts Act did not appear before this Court on 6-2-2003 when the Court passed the following order, which reads as follows:--

"None for the petitioner, AGP for respondent-State. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Contempt proceedings are dropped. Petition dismissed."

5.Now, after the proceedings have been dropped, the petitioner has applied by a Misc. Civil Application for restoration of contempt petition. The question is whether once the contempt proceedings have been dropped by this Court, they can be restored to file, like any other proceedings before this Court.

6.Having heard the learned Counsel for both the sides, I am of view that the proceedings for contempt once dropped cannot be restored, in view of the following position.

7.In the first place, it must been seen that the proceedings for contempt as to whether in respect of a civil contempt or a criminal contempt are none the less proceedings quasi criminal in character. The Contempt of Courts Act defines what is a civil contempt and what is a criminal contempt. The two kinds of contempt are defined as follows (b) and (c):--

"2(b) "civil contempt" means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a Court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a Court."

"2(c) "criminal contempt" means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which--

(i) Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any Court; or

(ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceedings; or

(iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner;

8.However, a civil or a criminal contempt is punishable in the same manner. Section 12(1) reads as follows:

"12. Punishment for Contempt of Court.---(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law, a contempt of Court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both:

Provided that the accused may be discharged or the punishment Awarded may be remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the Court.

Explanation.---An apology shall not be rejected merely on the ground that it is qualified or conditional if the accused makes it bona fide."

9.This section does not make any difference between the punishment for a civil contempt and punishment for a criminal contempt. In regard to both kinds of contempt, the person charged is described as an accused. In the matter of punishment the distinction which the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 draws in sub-sec

Click Here to Read the rest of this document