Any attempt to interfere with the due course of justice is a contempt of Court.

( 1 ) NOTICE was given to the opposite party who is the Judicial Secretary and Legal Remembrancer of the Government of the State of West Bengal to show cause why he should not be found guilty of contempt of Court and punished. This Court had been moved to issue such a Rule on the ground that the Judicial Secretary and Legal Remembrancer in his official capacity had written a letter dated 7th July 1950, to the Additional District Magistrate of 24 Parganas which, it was said, was a deliberate attempt to interfere with the due course of justice. The learned Advocate-General has appeared on behalf of the opposite party and Mr. A. K. . Basu has appeared on behalf of the petitioners who moved the Court.

( 2 ) THE petitioners Ramlal Rajghoria and Gorak Singh have been charged with the offence of murder. It is said that they murdered one Subodh Kumar Sarkar. It seems that there was a prolonged enquiry into the causes of the death of this man, Subodh Kumar Sarkar and at first the authorities declined to take cognizance of a complaint made by the deceased man's widow. Later, apparently cognizance was taken and the matter came before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Alipore, in his judicial capacity to conduct the preliminary enquiry.

( 3 ) IT seems that the complainant, the widow of the deceased man, was apprehensive that the usual prosecuting authorities would not prosecute this case with vigour and an application was made on her behalf to the Court under Section 495, Criminal P. C. , for permission for the prosecution to be carried on by herself through an advocate. The learned Sub-Divisional Officer considered this application on its merits and rejected it. He directed that the prosecution should be continued by the Court Inspector, who is of course the person who normally carries on prosecution in respect of serious offence on behalf of the State.

( 4 ) IT appears that the complainant, the widow of the deceased man, was dissatisfied with this order and submitted a representation to Government. I should have thought that the Government would have realised that they could take no action because there was a judicial order made by the Sub-Divisional Officer and until that order was varied or reversed by a superior criminal Court the order would have to be carried out. The Judicial Secretary and Legal Remembrancer however took action as a result of this representation made by the widow and on 7th July he wrote the following letter to Shri Manindra Kumar Sen, Additional District Magistrate, Alipore, who was of course the immediate superior of the Sub-Divisional Officer who was conducting the judicial enquiry in respect of this murder charge. The letter which the Judicial Secretary wrote is the subject-matter of this petition and it will be convenient to set out the letter in its entirety. It reads as follows : "dear Sj. Sen. In the texmaco Firing Case against the Manager Ramlal Rajghoria and the Durwan Gorakh Singh pending before the S. D. O. , Alipore the complainant has submitted a representation against the order of the S. D. O. directing a public prosecutor or a Court Inspector to take charge of the case. As the Government are not at present interested in the prosecution and the prosecution is being carried at the instance of a private party, Government desire that no Public Prosecutor or Court Inspector should appear at this stage and that if one has already appeared under the order of the S. D. O. he should be directed to retire. I am directed to request you that the S. D. O. and the Public Prosecutor or Court Inspector, if any appearing in the case, may be informed accordingly. "

( 5 ) ON the original letter which is now before the Court the following endorsements appear "show S. D. O. (s) at once for compliance. C. I. to note also. " This endorsement is initialled by the Additional District Magistrate and dated 7th July 1950. There is also an endorsement signed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, dated 7th July. That is i