IMPORTANT POINT
A contemnor may purge the contempt alleged by undertaking remedial measures and making substantive compliances with court orders.

JUDGMENT

Mini Pushkarna, J. (Oral)

1. The present contempt petition had been filed alleging willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgment of this court dated 19th September, 2007 in W.P.(C) No. 1772/2007, Kalpavriksh v. Union of India & Ors.; Order dated 10th February, 2010 in W.P.(C) No. 11162 of 2009, S.C. Jain v. Union of India & Anr. and Order dated 19th January, 2021 in Cont.Cas(C) 660/2020, titled as New Delhi Nature Society v. Shri Vinay Sheel Saxena and Ors..

2. The present contempt petition also alleges disobedience of order dated 23rd April, 2013 passed by the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A No. 82/2013, titled as Aditya N Prasad & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. and the restraining order dated 07th October, 2021 of the Tree Officer.

3. Mr. Jatan Singh, Learned Court Commissioner has handed over copy of status report dated 16th January, 2024. He submits that BSES Rajdhani Power Limited had been directed to plant 500 trees near the Mathura Road and 1500 trees in South and West Delhi. Thus, there were directions to plant 2000 trees by the BSES Rajdhani Power Limited. He submits that pursuant thereto, 2011 trees have been planted by the said department.

4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4 also submits that there were directions to respondent no.4 to plant 100 trees. He submits that on account of the same, the respondent no.4 has planted 183 trees.

5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 3 also submits that compliance of the various directions passed by this court, have already been made.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner refers to the order dated 24th May, 2023, wherein, there were directions to the respondent no.1- Public Works Department ("PWD") to carry out curving/realignment of the drain for the purposes of facilitation of plantation of trees at the sight in question. Thus, he submits that compliances are yet to be done by the respondent.

7. Responding thereto, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1 submits that the said realignment of the drain was done and the trees were planted. He further submits that affidavit in this regard was filed in other connected contempt petition, being Cont.Cas(C) 660/2020, which pertained to the area of Lodhi Road.

8. This court has perused the various orders passed by this court, which clearly show that substantive compliances have been undertaken by the respondents. The respondents have also tendered their unconditional apology to this court for delay in the compliances in terms of the aforesaid orders.

9. It would be relevant to refer to the order dated 29th May, 2023 passed by this Court, which reads as under:

"xxx xxx xxx

3. In view of the above, the court remits the sentence against R-1, R-2 and R-3 under the Proviso to S.12 (1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

4. At this stage, the learned counsel for R-1 to R-3 submits upon instructions, that visible and legible signages shall be put as a caution and reminder to all, that the trees were planted as an apology to the Court, therefore, in essence it is a Maafinama to Delhi High Court. He submits that some such signages shall be put up along i) the Supreme Court to Sundar Nagar stretch of Mathura Road; ii) on each of the traffic islands abutting the Lodhi Road Flyover; iii) next to the Metro Line near Jamia Millia Islamia University and iv) any other place where plantation has been carried out. Let R-1 to R-3 file affidavits along with photographs of what may have been accomplished, before the next date.

5. Apology (Maafi) when expressed sincerely, promptly and with contrition in due measure, often brings about peace and closure for the parties concerned. In the present case, plantation of trees by the contemnors is a manifestation of their atonement towards also society at large, for having cut down and/or damaged a number of trees. The larger purpose of compliance of the court's orders has been served by the contemnors, who include a former Executi