High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : V.K. Bali
Ashok Kumar Bhargava - Appellant
Versus
General - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4519/2005
Decided On : 11/18/2005
Contempt of Court - Court File Forwarding - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 15, Article 215
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a lawyer, filed a petition for contempt against another lawyer and the Registrar of the Court. He sought various reliefs including the return of the original court file and initiation of departmental proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the petitioner's reliefs to be untenable and rejected them. It was noted that the Advocate General rejected the prayer for initiation of contempt proceedings. The court also discussed the procedure for initiating contempt proceedings and the role of the Advocate General.
Issues: The issues included the petitioner's request for various reliefs, the procedure for initiating contempt proceedings, and the role of the Advocate General.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the mandatory requirement of obtaining the consent in writing of the Advocate General for initiating contempt proceedings. It also discussed the procedure for initiating contempt proceedings and the power of the court to issue notice or dismiss the contempt petition.
Final Decision: The court rejected all prayers of the petitioner and directed the office to put up the original contempt petition before an appropriate Bench for orders.
V.K. Bali, J.-This writ is sequal to an incident which happened in Court No. 8 on 13.04.2005 when, while dealing with the case, two lawyers of this Court, petitioner herein and Mr. Ashwani Garg appear to have exchanged hot words with each other. Both of them filed a petition for contempt against each other. Petitioner filed D.B. Criminal Contempt Petition 13.04.2005 against Mr. Ashwani Garg, Advocate and the Registrar (Admn.) of this Court is said to have forwarded it to the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) after putting his remarks. It is then averred in the petition that the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) kept the file in his cupboard for three days and on 19.04.2005 with the date of 15.04.2005 forwarded it to the Advocate General for further action under provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The original Court file is said to have been received by the Advocate General on 19.04.2005 but was pending at the time when the present writ petition was filed. It is averred that the petitioner made a request to the Advocate General on three occasions for taking appropriate action but he did not even think it proper to pay any attention to the entreaties made by him. Advocate General is said to have kept the file in cold storage. The act of Advocate General has been styled to be unreasonable in detaining the Court file in his office for a long time. It is then pleaded that there was no provision to forward the original Court file to the Advocate General, Rajasthan by the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) arrayed as second respondent in the present petition as per the High Court Rules as also the constitutional provisions as the petition was filed under Article 215 of the Constitution of India. The second respondent is stated to have acted deliberately and with mala fide intention while forwarding the original Court file to the Advocate General in order to protect order for initiation of contempt proceedings against Mr. Ashwani Garg. The act of Respondent No. 2 is said to have interfered and obstructed administration of justice. By way of illustration, the petitioner states that D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 2338/2004 titled Paras Kuhad vs. RHCB & Ors. was never forwarded to the Advocate General for action, by the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) but this time the second respondent acted in issuing letter No. 79 dated 15.04.2005 by sending the file to the Advocate General. Second respondent did not think it even proper to register the case in Registry and rather chose to sent the file to the Advocate General at his own level. Any petition submitted in the Registry, in submission of the petitioner, has to be registered as per the High Court Rules but the second respondent himself unconstitutionally and in an arbitrary manner and against the High Court Rules, sent it to the Advocate General for which he needs to be punished.
2. In the wake of pleadings as mentioned above, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
“(i) to issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondents No. 1 Advocate General, Rajasthan to return the Court original criminal contempt petition file referred by Dy. Registrar (Judil.) vide letter No. 79 dated 15.04.2005 within a period of three days positively with further direction to explain why such serious matter file is detained by him for a long period.
(ii) issue an appropriate writ of mandamus directing Respondent No. 2 and 3 to explain under what provision of High Court Rules/laws, the Court original file without registering/inwarding in Registry is forwarded to Advocate General, Rajasthan specially when D.B. Criminal Petition No. 12338/1994 was not referred previously by him.
(iii) issuean appropriate order or direction to Registrar General, Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur/Jaipur to initiate departmental proceedings against Respondent No. 2 of his misconduct and acting in his own manner without provision of Rules forwarding the file to Advocate General, Rajasthan and registering/ inwarding the file in the Registry.
Further it is also p
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.