Back
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
S. Barman, C. J. And A. Misra, J.
SARAT CHANDRA BISWAL - Appellant
Versus
SURENDRA MOHANTY, EDITOR "Kalinga" - Respondent
Original Criminal Misc. Case 4 Of 1968
Decided On : AUGUST 07, 1968
The Orissa High Court dealt with two contempt cases arising out of a representation petition filed by a party in a pending writ petition and publications in a local newspaper. The Court discussed the background of the cases, including a ceremony held at the High Court premises to celebrate the First Flag Hoisting over the newly constructed Tower. The Court also addressed the issue of the constitution of the Bench hearing the cases, as the Chief Justice's speech and actions during the ceremony were the subject of criticism. The Court held that the Chief Justice should be on the Bench to hear the cases, considering the special circumstances and the need for clarification of matters alleged to have caused misapprehensions and misunderstandings among the public.
Fact of the Case:
A representation petition was filed by a party in a pending writ petition, alleging derogatory statements against the Orissa High Court, its Judges, and the Chief Justice. The petition was signed by the petitioner and three Advocates. Subsequently, news items and an editorial were published in a local newspaper, commenting on the ceremony held at the High Court premises to celebrate the First Flag Hoisting over the newly constructed Tower. Notices for contempt were issued to the petitioner, his Advocates, and the Editor, Printer, and Publisher of the newspaper.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the derogatory statements in the representation petition, particularly paragraphs 20, 24, and 25, amounted to contempt of court. The Court found that the statements had the tendency to hinder or obstruct the due course of administration of justice by the Court and were calculated to undermine the confidence of the people in the integrity of the Judges. The Court also held that the Advocates who signed and filed the petition were guilty of contempt for failing to satisfy themselves about the prima facie existence of adequate grounds for making such allegations.
Issues: 1. Whether the derogatory statements in the representation petition amounted to contempt of court. 2. Whether the Advocates who signed and filed the petition were guilty of contempt. 3. Whether the news items and editorial published in the newspaper amounted to contempt of court.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the derogatory statements in the representation petition, particularly paragraphs 20, 24, and 25, amounted to contempt of court. The Court found that the statements had the tendency to hinder or obstruct the due course of administration of justice by the Court and were calculated to undermine the confidence of the people in the integrity of the Judges. 2. The Court held that the Advocates who signed and filed the petition were guilty of contempt for failing to satisfy themselves about the prima facie existence of adequate grounds for making such allegations. 3. The Court held that the news items and editorial published in the newspaper did not amount to contempt of court, as they were intended to be fair and impartial reporting of the events and did not have the tendency to interfere with the administration of justice.
Final Decision: The Court found the petitioner, his Advocates, and the Editor, Printer, and Publisher of the newspaper guilty of contempt of court. The petitioner and his Advocates were sentenced to pay fines, while the proceedings against the Editor, Printer, and Publisher of the newspaper were dropped.
BARMAN, C. J.
( 1 ) ORIGINAL Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 4 of 1968 of alleged contempt arises out of a petition of an unusual nature described as a "representation petition"-without mention of opposite party and without any specific prayer against anybody--filed by Sri San tosh Kumar Sahu, a party in a pending writ petition (O. T. C. No. 418 of 1967) in this High Court, alleged to contain matters purporting to scandalise the Orissa High Court, its Judges and the Chief Justice in particular; and original Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 3 of 1968 arises out of the publication of certain news items and editorial in the Oriya daily "kalinga' of Cuttack--all in connection with the ceremony of the First Flag Hoisting over the newly constructed tower over the Orissa High Court on the last Republic Day, January 26, 1968.
( 2 ) IN Original Criminal Miscellaneous Case No, 4 of 1968 the opposite parties against whom notices were issued by this Court were Sri Santosh Kumar Sahu of the Congress Party, a former Deputy Minister in the previous Government and Sri dinabandhu Sahu, Sri Raghunath Das and Sri S. F. Ahmad, Advocates of this High court. In Original Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 3 of 1968, the opposite parties on whom notices for alleged contempt were issued, were Sri Surendra Mohanty, editor of the 'kalinga' and Sri Bankim Chandra Das, Printer and Publisher of the 'kalinga' Sri Santosh Kumar Sahu was also made a party in the said case. The background in which notices for contempt were issued against the opposite parties are, shortly stated, as follows; a. Genesis : Background :
( 3 ) IN October 1967, a Commission of Enquiry was appointed by the present Orissa swatantra-Jana Congress Coalition Government to enquire into the conduct and actions of 15 persons who were members of the various Ministries from 1961 to 1966 including Sri Santosh Kumar Sahu. Writ petitions were filed by some of the aggrieved Ministers of the Congress Party--whose conduct and actions were to be investigated --including Sri P. V. Jagannatha Rao, Sri Biren Mitra and Sri Santosh kumar Sahu, challenging the validity of the Notification appointing the Commission of Inquiry set up by the Orissa Government. The first of these writ petitions O. J. C. No. 396 of 1967 was tiled by Sri Jagannath Rao, a former Minister of the Congress Party, on November 13, 1967; O. J. C. No. 408 of 1967 was filed by Sri biren Mitra, a former Chief Minister of the Congress Party, on November 22, 1967; and lastly, O. J. C. No. 418 of 1967 was filed by Sri Santosh Kumar Sahu, a former deputy Minister of the previous Congress Government, on December 1, 1967. The State of Orissa, Secretary, Home Department; Justice Sri H. R. Khanna, the commission of Inquiry; and Sri R. N. Singh Deo, Chief Minister of Orissa, were opposite parties 1 to 4 respectively in all the writ petitions. In the last of these writ petitions O. J. C. No. 418 of 1967, five more opposite parties are stated to have been impleaded, namely, Dr. H. K. Mahtab, Sri Mabakrishna Chowdhury, Sri pabitra Mohan Pradhan, Sri Santanu Kumar Das and Sri Surendra Nath Patnaik, It is said that Dr. H. K. Mahtab, leader of the Jana Congress Party, and Sri R. N. Singh Deo now Chief Minister of Orissa and leader of the Swatantra Party, filed affidavits purporting to be in support of the appointment of the Commission of inquiry against the various members of the previous Government. It is apparent that, as usual, when there was serious tussle between two rival political parties they criticised each other; and from their respective angle of approach mutual criticism is understandable.
( 4 ) ON November 13, 1987, when the earliest of these writ petitions O. J. C. No. 896 of 1967 was filed and listed for admission on November 14, 1967, the only available Division Bench which could take up this matter was the Division Bench consisting of Mr. Justice G. K. Misra and Mr. Justice S. K. Ray, as the Chief Justice was on that day away on tour in
AI
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
