JUDGMENT

S.S. Dewan, J. - The respondents Constable Satbir Singh, Sub-Inspector Ram Phal and Shri S.D. Prashar have appeared in this Court in answer to a notice to show-cause why they should not be convicted and punished for contempt of Court. To appreciate the points involved, it will be necessary to set out the facts giving rise to these proceedings in some detail.

2. On 19.3.1986, Shri Arun Maitri who was then posted as Judicial Magistrate First Class at Palwal recorded the statement of Sham Lal, a resident of village Mitrol, as PW 5 in case State v. Moti Lal and others (FIR No. 117 dated 15.8.1984 registered at Police Station Sadar, Palwal, under sections 332/353/379/186/34 Indian Penal Code) Sham Lal having gone hostile, refused to support the prosecution case. Shri S.D. Prashar, Assistant District Attorney requested the Court to initiate proceedings against Sham Lal PW under Section 193, Indian Penal Code. Since Shri S.D. Prashar made an oral request, the Magistrate did not pass any order and directed him to make an application in writing which may be decided at the proper stage. It is alleged that Shri S.D. Prashar never made any application for the prosecution of Sham Lal on