Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Criminal contempt proceedings were initiated against 10 Contemnors namely :Pradhuman Kumar Srivastava, Advocate (Contemnor No. 1); Arvind Kumar Gautam, Advocate (Contemnor No. 2); Gyanendra Singh Rajawat, Advocate (Contemnor No. 3); Suresh Dixit, Advocate (Contemnor No. 4); Raghunath Das Bishnoi, Advocate (Contemnor No. 5); Yusuf Ishtiyaq, Advocate (Contemnor No. 6); Karmksheta Awasthi, Advocate (Contemnor No. 7); Aftab Ahmad, Advocate (Contemnor No. 8); Udai Shankar Dwivedi, Advocate (Contemnor No. 9); and, Pankaj Gupta, Advocate (Contemnor No. 10), pursuant to an inquiry report of an incident took place on 20th November, 2014 in the afternoon, in District Judgeship Jalaun at Orai in the Court of Manoj Kumar Shukla, Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Jalaun at Orai (hereinafter referred to as “Informant-Presiding Officer”).

2. The advocates alongwith the aforesaid Contemnors pressurized Informant-Presiding Officer to retire in Chamber since advocates had passed a resolution of abstention and when he resented, advocates manhandled, assaulted and insulted him. Informant-Presiding Officer narrated the entire incident to Administrative Judge on telephone and also said that District Judge did not take any appropriate action in the matter. On the recommendation of Administrative Judge, Chief Justice vide order dated 21.11.2014 directed a fact finding inquiry, which was conducted by Sri Virendra Kumar-II, Special Officer (Vigilance), High Court, Allahabad [hereinafter referred to as “S.O. (Vig.)”] and he submitted report on 17.12.2014. The report was accepted by Administrative Committee of Court and in the light of the findings recorded by S.O.(Vig.), matter was assigned to Committee dealing with contempt reference from subordinate Courts.

3. On 23.2.2015, Committee, prima facie finding a case of criminal contempt, made recommendation whereupon Chief Justice vide order dated 28.3.2015 directed the matter to be placed before Court on judicial side having jurisdiction of criminal contempt.

4. On 7th May, 2015, Court noticing the fact that Contemnors have been found to abuse informant-Presiding Officer, shouted slogans and assaulted him by throwing CPU of computer and pen holder, creating ruckus and ransacked dais of Court, and in the incident some advocates also sustained injuries, found prima facie case of ‘criminal contempt’ against the aforesaid advocates since their aforesaid acts amount to scandalizing the Court, interfering and obstructing administration of justice, tarnishing image of Court and lowering down dignity and authority of Court, issued notice requiring them to show-cause why they may not be punished for committing contempt.

5. Contemnors appeared before Court on 7th July, 2015 represented by Sri Dharam Pal Singh, Senior Advocate, who requested to supply a copy of enquiry report dated 17.12.2014. Court issued direction to this effect.

6. Contemnors then filed replies and after perusing the same, Court framed charge against Contemnors on 24.8.2015, which reads as under :

“You, Pradhuman Kumar Srivastava, Arvind Kumar Gautam, Gyanendra Singh Rajawat, Suresh Dixit, Raghunath Das Bishnoi, Yusuf Ishtiyaq, Karmkshetra Awasthi, Aftab Ahmad, Udai Shankar Dwivedi and Pankaj Gupta, Advocates, who are all stated to be practising lawyers and also associated with the District Bar Association of Jalaun at Orai on 20th November, 2014 at about 12.45 p.m. forcibly entered Court No. 3 presided over by Sri Manoj Kumar Shukla, the Additional District & Sessions Judge and shouted slogans using unparliamentary language and assaulted him physically by throwing items on his dais thereby creating a ruckus and ransacked the Court resulting in injuries sustained by some of the advocates in the Court room that left the Court scandalized thereby lowering the esteem of the judiciary. The said incident therefore amounts to a clear interference with and an obstruction in the administration of justic