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

1996(2) Crimes 130 (SC)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N.P. Singh & S. Saghir Ahmad, JJ.
State of Maharashtra -Appellant
versus
Mahboob S. Allibhoy & Anr. -Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 42 of 1992
Decided on 10-4-1996

IMPORTANT POINT
No appeal is maintainable against an order dropping proceedings for contempt or refusing to initiate proceedings for contempt and remedy available to aggrieved person is to involve jurisdiction under Article 136 of Constitution. 

Headnote:(i) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971-Section 19-order dropping proceedings for contempt-Appeal is not maintainable-Remedy available to person on whose petition contempt proceedings were dropped or dismissed is under Article 136 of Constitution. (Paras 5 & 6)

       (ii) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971-Section 19-Appeal against Order of High Court dropping contempt proceedings-High Court passed order directing that complaint be lodged against respondents and thought it proper not to pursue proceedings for contempt Order could not be said requiring interference in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 136 of Constitution. (Para 7)

       Result: Appeal dismissed.

       

ORDER

This appeal has been filed on behalf of the State of Maharashtra for setting aside an order dated 12th July, 1988 passed by the High Court of Bombay dropping the contempt proceeding which had been initiated against the respondents.

2. It appears that respondents had filed a writ petition before the High Court claiming refund of Rs. 2,60,144-70 paid as countervailing/additional duty. The Customs department filed an affidavit stating that a false claim had been made before the Court for obtaining refund because in fact the writ petitioners respondents had not paid any duty at all and had claimed the refund on basis of forged documents. In connection with the said dispute, a notice was issued to the respondents as to why a complaint be not filed against them under Sections 191, 192, 209 and 210 of the Indian Penal Code. A notice was also issued to the respondents directing them to show cause why proceedings for contempt be not initiated against them. After taking into consideration the show cause filed on behalf of the respondents an order was passed directing that a complaint be filed against them. The learned Judges having passed the aforesaid order directed that no action be taken under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). This part of the order is being challenged in this appeal. According to the appellant-State in the facts and circumstances of the present case the contempt proceeding should not have been dropped.

3. The preliminary question which has to be examined as to whether in the facts and circumstances of the case an appeal is maintainable against an order dropping the proceeding for contempt. It is well settled that an appeal is a creature of a statute. Unless a statute provides for an appeal and specifies the order against which an appeal can be filed, no appeal can be filed or entertained as a matter of right or course, Section 19 of the Act says:

"Appeals- (1) an appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt

(a) where the order or decision is that of a single Judge, to a Bench of not less than two Judges of the Court;

(b) where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court:

Provided that where the order or decision is that of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union Territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.

(2) Pending any appeal, the appellate Court may order that

(a) the execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended;

(b) if the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail; and

(c) the appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt.

(3) Where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfies the High Court that he intends to prefer an appeal the High Court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by sub-section (2).

(4) An appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed-

(a) in the case of an appeal to a Bench of the High Court, within thirty days;

(b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against. "

On a plain reading Section 19 provides that an appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. In other words, if the High Court passes an order in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish any person for contempt of court, them only an appeal shall be maintainable under subsection (1) of Section 19 of the Act. As subsection (1) of Section 19 provides that an appeal shall lie as of right from any order an impression is created that an appeal has been provided under the said sub-section against any order passed by the High Court while exercising the jurisdiction of contempt proceedings. The words 'any order' has to be read with the expression 'decision' used in said sub-section which the High Court passes in exercise o

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 Back to top