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

1960 Supreme(Pat) 107

PATNA HIGH COURT
H.K.Chaudhuri and Tarkeshwar Nath JJ.
In Re
Versus
.
Original Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2 of 1960 ;
Decided On : MAY 12, 1960

The act complained of, which is alleged to constitute contempt, is an offence under the Indian Penal Code but other than an offence under Sections 175, 178, 179, 180 or Sec.228 of the Code, then the jurisdiction of the High Court is not excluded.

Headnote:

CONTEMPT OF COURT - [KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [ACT SECTION LIST] - [SUMMARY]

Fact of the Case:

The contemner, Bhola Nath Chaudhary, addressed the court in a violent and excited manner, interrupting the proceeding of the court and in the course of his address he did the following: 1. Called Pandey Narsingh Sahay Jhutha and accused him for exercising influence over the Munsif Magistrate for getting his son convicted. 2. Threatened Pandey Narsingh Sahay and the Minsif Magistrate as well with violence. 3. Attacked the integrity of the Munsif-Magistrate and that of Pandey Narsingh Sahay, Publice Prosecutor, 4. Attempted to overawe the Additional Sessions Judge and the Public Prosecutor by naming the high dignitaries in connection with the case then pending in criminal appeal.

Finding of the Court:

The contemner Bhola Nath Chaudhary has brought himself clearly within the ambit of the offence of contempt of court and he is accordingly found guilty.

Issues: None

Ratio Decidendi: The acts alleged constitute contempt as they scandalized the court and had the tendency to overawe the Additional Sessions Judge and the Public Prosecutor with regard to that pending case.

Final Decision: The contemner Bhola Nath Chaudhary is found guilty of contempt of court and is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 within two weeks from today and in default of payment of the fine he must undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six weeks. He is also mulcted with costs of Rs. 500.00 payable to the State.

Judgment

Tarkeshwar Nath, J.

1. This Court, by an order dated 16-2-1960, directed Bhola Nath Chaudhary, contemner, to show cause by 8th March 1960 why he should not be committed for contempt of court for causing obstruction to the proceedings in the Court of Sri K. S. Pande, First Addl. Sessions Judge, Patna, after he dictated an order on 19-12-1959 refusing bail to Sushil Kumar Choudhary, appellant, in Criminal Appeal No. 470 of 1959 (Sushil Kumar Chaudhury V/s. The State) and for addressing the learned Addl. Sessions Judge loudly and vehemently and in a highly excited and furious manner in course of which he (1) vilified and insulted the Public Prosecutor Sri Pande Narsingh Sahai, (2) threatened the Munsiff Magistrate who had tried the criminal case giving rise to the criminal appeal, and the Public Prosecutor with violence boasting that it was he who had fired at Lord Wavell, (3) attacked the integrity of the trying Magistrate and the Public Prosecutor alleging that the latter had secured the judgment of conviction in the case against Sushil Kumar Chaudhary by exercising influence over the Magistrate, (4) attempted to overawe the Addl. Sessions Judge, the Munsiff Magistrate and the Public Prosecutor by naming some high dignitaries in connection with the criminal appeal, (5) gave out that he would get his son released by the President of India and (6) alleged that the conviction of his son Sushil Kumar Chau-dhary was brought about by means of a conspiracy hatched by the Public Prosecutor and others.

2. The facts and circumstances in which this proceeding was drawn up are these: On 20-3-1959 some time after 3-45 p.m., three girls and a boy Rakesh Kumar, were returning home from the Womens College, Patna, on a rickshaw driven by Jagdeo Mandal Two boys on one cycle followed them from the College and when the rickshaw reached near the building then occupied by the Oriental Life Assurance Company, on the Dak Bungalow Road, they came on the right side of the rickshaw and one of them who was tall and was driving the cycle, threw some liquid on the occupants of the said rickshaw. That boy and the other one who had brown hair and white complexion and was sitting on the carrier of the cycle fled away. The liquid, however, fell on the four occupants of the rickshaw and also on the driver and they felt much pain and an alarm was raised. The drivers attempt to get at the miscreants was futile. The rickshaw proceeded ahead and reached up to a laundry known as M/s. Sunshine" from where an information was sent to the guardians of those girls about this incident. Dr. R. V/s. P. Sinha, who was returning with his daughter from the College by the same route, found those girls and the boy in misery and came to their rescue by taking them to the hospital in his car. Medical aid was given to them in the Medical College hospital and an information was sent to the Sub-Inspector of Pirbahore Police Station.

The Sub-Inspector went to the Hospital, and recorded the statement of Onika Kapoor, one of the girls. Investigation proceeded and Sushil Ku-mar Chaudhary was arrested later in the night the same day whereas one Sultan Jaffar was arrested on the following day. They were put on a test identification parade on 21st March, 1959 and Sushil Kumar Chaudhary was identified by two girls and the driver of the rickshaw. The police submitted a charge-sheet against Sushil Kumar Chaudhary and Sultan Jaffar and they were put on trial. They pleaded innocence and alleged that they were falsely implicated. The trial was a long and protracted one. The evidence in the case was recorded by Sri Ramji Upadhya. a Magistrate of the 1st class, and a date was fixed for judgment. Sushil Kumar Chaudhary did not, however, appear on that date and the judgment could not be delivered. The case was later transferred to the file of Shri Shambhunath Sinha, Magistrate, Patna and heard the arguments.

He held that Sushil Kumar Chaudhary threw sulphuric acid on the three girls and the bo















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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