Back
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :K.G.Shah, M.S.Parikh
STATE OF GUJARAT - Appellant
Versus
S.O.TRIVEDI - Respondent
C.A. 1820 of 1979
Decided On : 08/21/1980
Contempt of Courts Act 1973 – Section 5, 15, 17 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 14 – Contempt of Courts Act 1971 – Section 12 – Public adviser – Publishing of pamphlet in Gujarati language – Contemptuous and scurrilous allegations - When this pamphlet was brought to the notice of Registry it was found that the allegations made by respondent in pamphlet contained per se criminal contempt of Court for the various allegations made by the respondent in pamphlet prima facie scandalised and lowered authority of Court Proceedings therefore have been initiated against the respondent and a rule has been issued to him rule has been served to him and he has filed his reply to the rule – In his reply to rule he has tried to justify the statements made by him in the pamphlet – Prima facie case for framing a formal charge of criminal contempt against respondent has been made out for a bare reading of the pamphlet which is a subject-matter of contempt proceedings would show that author of phamplet has made a deliberate attempt to scandalise judicial and he has tried to lower authority of Court – Held, This is then the nature of apology expressed by the opponent at end when opponent must have had feeling of no escape We need not set out all the precedents which have been referred on the question of apology for the simple reason that we feel that opponent did not have any feeling of repetance and has not even expressed apology which can be said to be genuine As a matter of fact we are at pains to state that we at effect with a feeling that expression of apology in the aforesaid terms is nothing but a camouflage We are not the least inclined to accept the apology so tendered by the opponent While reaching this conclusion we have had in our minds a recent decision of Honble Supreme Court in the case of Pritam – Question very minutely and having gone through various statements made and defence raised by the opponent in his various replies dealt with by us hereinabove we have not the slightest hereinabove in saying that the opponent deliberately and intentionally wanted to scandalise this Court as also the Court of Shri Lalaji Magistrate and to lower authority of Court. With that end in view he got printed published and distributed the pamphlet such as one which is the subject-matter of this contempt proceeding Looking to language used by the opponent and the allegations made by him against Justice this Court as also against Magistrate there could be no two opinions that the opponent has committed gravest possible contempt of Court. The opponent is therefore required to be dealt with sternly firstly for the reason that he may realise that scandalising the Court and lowering authority of Court is not only not a gainful proposition but the judicial institution is required to be respected for it has been charged with a duly to dispense even handed justice without fear of favour (Emphasis supplied.) and secondly the society should also have a deter rent cognizance of fact that whosoever commits criminal contempt of Court would have to face consequences similar to those which the present opponent as a result of this judgment shall have to face – Appeal is disposed.
( 1 ) THIS suo motu contempt proceeding would illustrate how and to what extent a person with his ingenuity can abuse the process of Court and can damage the image of this pious institution in the eye of public.
( 2 ) THIS contempt case would also provide a classic instance of the height of a criminal contempt by means of publication scandalising as also thereby towering the authority of this Court by picking up Judge X or Judge Y as the target.
( 3 ) MR. S. O. Trivedi posing himself to be a public adviser and also claiming to be working as detective of crime of Vadodara had indulged in issuing a Patrika (a publication in the form of pamphlet) which was found in the process of being distributed on 11/08/1986 by the members of staff of this Court and he was identified by them as the same Mr. Trivedi who distributed some pamphlet on 26/02/1986 when he was taken by them to the Registrar Joint Registrar and Additional Registrar of this Court. At this stage it might only be stated that the pamphlet is nothing but display of abuses to a particular Judge of this Court in his capacity as a Judge in some proceeding. The pamphlet being in Gujarati was translated into English and placed by the In-charge Additional Registrar in the form of his submission dated 21-8-1986 to the Honble the Chief Justice or this Court for transferring the papers to the Criminal Department for the purpose of the same being placed before this Court for Judicial determination alongwith pamphlet which was found to have been distributed by Mr. S. O. Trivedi the opponent herein.
( 4 ) THE Honble the Chief Justice by his order dated 22/08/1986 approved of the suggestion made in the report of In-charge Additional Registrar of this Court and the matter was then given aforesaid Criminal Misc. Application No. It is in this fashion that this contempt proceeding commenced against the respondent who happened to be the publisher and distributer of the pamphlet in question containing scandalous allegations against a sitting Judge of this Court lowering down the authority and image of this Court Rule was issued on 2-9-86 against the opponent returnable on 29/09/1986. Ultimately the matter was fixed before this Court The facts of the proceedings. The facts containing abuses and allegations which would tend to lower down the authority of this institution are self-contained in the pamphlet itself on the basis of which the charge against the present opponent has been framed it would therefore be appropriate to set out the charge which this Court was required to frame against present opponent on 24/07/1992 Before setting out the charge as such we would like to reproduce the order which we had an occasion to pass at the time of framing of the charge"this criminal contempt proceedings have been initiated suo motu by the High Court. The respondent Mr. S. O. Trivedi who claims to be a public adviser has published and distributed certain pamphlet in Gujarati language. In that pamphlet he has made various wild contemptuous and scurrilous allegations against Shri A. P. Ravani Judge of this High Court When this pamphlet was brought to the notice of Registry it was found that the allegations made by the respondent in the pamphlet contained per se criminal contempt of Court for the various allegations made by the respondent in the pamphlet prima facie scandalised and lowered the authority of the Court Proceedings therefore have been initiated against the respondent and a rule has been issued to him. The rule has been served to him and he has filed his reply to the rule. In his reply to the rule he has tried to justify the statements made by him in the pamphlet. In that reply he has contended that as he has made allegations against Mr. Justice A. P. Ravani in the personal capacity of Mr. Justice Ravani for which Mr. Justice Ravani can take criminal action against him no contempt proceedings can be initiated against him He has further contended that what he has stated in the
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
