IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, JOYMALYA BAGCHI, JJ.
In Re: Vikas Mishra @ Vikash Mishra - Appellant
C.R.R. No. 3519 of 2022 in C.R.M. 1638 of 2022
Decided On : 23-02-2023
CONTEMPT OF COURT - WILLFUL VIOLATION OF COURT ORDER - SUPERINTENDENT OF CORRECTIONAL HOME - FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH COURT'S DIRECTION REGARDING MEDICAL EXAMINATION AND SHIFTING OF UNDERTRIAL FROM HOSPITAL TO JAIL WARD - FINDING OF WILFUL CONTEMPT - IMPOSITION OF FINE.
Fact of the Case:
The Superintendent of Presidency Correctional Home, Kolkata, was alleged to have wilfully violated a court order directing the medical examination of an undertrial and his shifting from the hospital to the jail ward for interrogation. Despite medical opinion suggesting the undertrial's fitness for interrogation, the Superintendent kept him in the hospital, prompting the court to issue a contempt rule.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the Superintendent guilty of wilful, deliberate, and contumacious violation of the court order. It held that the Superintendent's conduct was not bonafide and was motivated by an intention to provide special treatment to the undertrial, who was an influential businessman.
Issues: 1. Whether the Superintendent wilfully violated the court's order by keeping the undertrial in the hospital despite medical opinion suggesting his fitness for interrogation? 2. Whether the Superintendent's conduct was bonafide or motivated by an ulterior motive?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Superintendent's conduct amounted to wilful contempt of court. It noted that there was no medical opinion suggesting that the undertrial required hospitalization, yet the Superintendent chose to keep him in the hospital, in violation of the court's order. The court also found that the Superintendent's intention was not bonafide, but rather to provide special treatment to the undertrial.
Final Decision: The court found the Superintendent guilty of contempt and imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.
JUDGMENT
1. It is common knowledge there is opacity in the prison system. But when opacity interferes with implementation of judicial orders, the Court cannot turn a blind eye.
2. Factual matrix giving rise to the contempt proceeding against the alleged contemnor viz. Superintendent, Presidency Correctional Home is as follows :-
3. One Vikas Mishra @ Vikash Mishra, an influential businessman, was re-arrested on 09.12.2021 in connection with investigation regarding illegal pilferage of coal by the coal Mafia in collusion with ECL officials in the coal mines of Asansol. Immediately after his arrest, he was admitted to a private hospital. Thereafter, he was shifted to Asansol District Hospital and therefrom to a teaching hospital viz. SSKM Hospital, Kolkata. As his prayer for statutory bail was turned down by the Special Judge, Vikas Mishra @ Vikash Mishra approached this court.
4. During hearing of the bail application, it was strenuously argued on behalf of the learned Advocate for the CBI that the under trial had evaded interrogation on the excuse of ill-health and hospitalisation. Balancing the competing interest of custodial interrogation on one hand and ensuring adequate medical attention, if any, of the under trial on the other hand, this Court passed the following order :-
“Balancing the aforesaid requirements in the factual matrix of the case, we permit the Investigating Agency to interrogate the petitioner in judicial custody subject to permission by medical expert/experts as per the choice of the Investigating Agency. In the event the expert opines institutionalised treatment is not necessary, the petitioner shall be forthwith shifted to judicial custody and be interrogated in jail.
While in judicial custody, the petitioner shall be medically examined from time to time not later than every 48 hours. Medical report with regard to the petitioner shall be furnished before the jurisdictional court. In the event the medical report discloses deterioration of health including necessity for hospitalisation, necessary order shall be passed.”
5. Deconstructing the order it would appear this Court had directed as follows :-
(a) Vikas Mishra @ Vikash Mishra would be examined by a medical expert;
(b) If the expert gave permission, he shall be interrogated in jail;
(c) He shall be medically examined periodically not later than over 48 hours and shall not be shifted to hospital save and except the opinion of the medical expert.
6. In terms of the order, on 31.08.2022 Dr. Dipankar Samajpati, Chief Medical Officer, Central Government Health Service, Govt. of India visited Presidency Correctional Home and examined Vikas Mishra @ Vikash Mishra. Dr. Samajpati, inter alia, opined that Vikas Mishra was fit for interrogation and did not require hospitalisation at present. Thereafter, Vikas Mishra was interrogated on 01.09.2022. However, immediately after interrogation, without any medical opinion to the contrary, Vikas Mishra was shifted back to the hospital. He continued to remain in the hospital and was not physically produced before the jurisdictional court on 03.09.2022. On 05.09.2022, Dr. Samajpati wrote to the Head of the Branch, Central Bureau of Investigation, ACB, Kolkata that the Superintendent of the Correctional Home was not cooperating with the medical examination of Vikas Mishra @ Vikash Mishra. Subsequently, on 06.09.2022, Dr. Samajpati was permitted to examine the under trial and he opined that the under trial was fit for further interrogation. There was no medical emergency at present. Still then, Vikas Mishra continued to enjoy the protection of the Superintendent and remained in the hospital.
7. This prompted the Court to issue a Rule of contempt upon the said Superintendent. Immediately after the issuance of the Rule of contempt, Vikas Mishra was shifted to the jail ward. He was medically examined by Dr. Samajpati on 10.09.2022 and thereafter every 48 hours till th
The Superintendent's conduct in wilfully violating the court's order by keeping the undertrial in the hospital despite medical opinion suggesting his fitness for interrogation amounted to contempt of....
The willful disobedience of a binding precedent by a public authority undermines the rule of law and constitutes contempt of court, warranting penalties to uphold judicial authority.
The selective application of binding precedent by an authority strikes at the root of the administration of justice.
Government's discretionary rejection of premature release for life convict under G.O. guidelines citing Section 224 IPC escape not contemptuous.
Transfer of under-trial prisoners requires judicial reasoning and fair procedure; arbitrary transfers violate rights and must be quashed.
The judgment emphasizes the interpretation and application of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in determining the commencement of a convict's imprisonment term.
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.