P. L. BHARGAVA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application in revision, which is directed against an order, dated 3-11-1950, made by a Magistrate of the first class of Pargana Rath, in the district of Hamirpur, and confirmed on appeal by the learned Sessions Judge of Hamirpur. The facts and circumstances which have given rise to this revision are these :

( 2 ) AS against the applicant, Ramnath, and certain other person, proceedings under Section 107, criminal P. C. , were pending in the Court of the Magistrate. In connection with the said proceedings, the applicant appeared in the Magistrates Court. It is said that when the applicant appeared before the Court he was "badly drunk and could not control himself" and that "he was talking irrelevant thereby causing insult and interruption to the Courts work. " The Magistrate being of the opinion that the applicant had by his conduct and behaviour committed contempt of court, punishable under Section 228, Penal Code, took cognizance of the offence under Section 480, Criminal P. C. He immediately served upon the applicant a notice calling upon him to show cause, why proceedings for contempt of Court, be not taken against him. In the notice, it was stated that the applicant had appeared in Court in connection with the case of dhaniram v. Bamnath, under Section 107, Criminal P. C. , and that he was badly drunk and talked irrelevant causing insult and interruption in Court. In reply to the notice, the applicant filed a writtten statement, saying that he had intentionally committed no wrong and that if he had committed any mistake, he might be excused. The Magistrate recorded the statement of the applicant, wherein he denied being drunk and his having uttered anything irrelevant. There is nothing else on the record, besides the order passed by the Magistrate.

( 3 ) IN the order which is on the record, the Magistrate has stated :

"ramnath. . . . appeared today in my Court as a accused in the case, Dhaniram v. Ramnath under section 107, Criminal P. C. He was badly drunk and could not control himself. He was talking irrelevant thereby causing insult and interruption to the Courts work. "

Thereafter the learned Magistrate has stated that he took cognizance of the offence, called upon the applicant to show cause and ho denied being drunk. Then he has observed :"i am fully satisfied from his talk, way of walking and the smell coming from his mouth from a distance that ha is badly drunk. He also interrupted the Courts work and also caused insult by his irrelevant and out of the point talk. "

( 4 ) IN regard to the question whether the applicant had intentionally committed contempt, the learned Magistrate has pointed out that the fact that the applicant had taken the liquor of his own free will, before coining to the Court, was a direct proof of his committing the offence in-tentionally. Accordingly, the Magistrate convicted the applicant for contempt of Court and sentenced him, under Section 480, Criminal P. C. , to pay a fine of Rs. 51 or in default of payment of fine to undergo 15 days simple imprisonment. The applicant went up in appeal before the Sessions Judge of Hamirpur, who has upheld the conviction and the sentence.

( 5 ) IN this revision, it has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the Magistrate did not comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 481, Criminal P. C. , inasmuch as he did not "record the facts constituting the offence," and the record of the Magistrate does not "show the nature and stage of the judicial proceedings, in which the Court interrupted or insulted was sitting, and the nature of the interruption or insult. " It has been pointed out that the mere statement that the applicant was talking irrelevant was not sufficient, and the record should have shown the words actually uttered by him.

( 6 ) IN my opinion, the record of this case does contain record of the facts constituting the offence. The important fact which, in the opinion of the Magistrate, constituted the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document