Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SANTOSH RAI
Kunal – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegations and procedural failures in criminal proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. disruptive behavior as contempt of court. (Para 8) |
| 3. court's stance on maintaining respect during proceedings. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. referral for contempt proceedings to chief justice. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
SANTOSH RAI, J.
1. Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Purushottam Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondent are present.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and the statement of injured has not been recorded by the I.O.
3. Learned AGA admits the fact that though the FIR has been registered on 19.1.2026 but the statement of injured Yash Jain has not been recorded by the I.O. during the course of investigation.
4. As per the allegation contained in the FIR, the injured has sustained firearm injury on his chest.
5. Considering all the facts and circumstances, learned AGA is directed to file counter affidavit alongwith complete medical evidence/injury report and statement of injured as well as doctor within three weeks.
6. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week.
7.
Professional conduct during court proceedings necessitates respect for judicial authority, with contempt applicable for derogatory remarks and disruptive behavior.
The court emphasized the necessity of maintaining judicial dignity and the procedural safeguards required in contempt proceedings, highlighting that failure to frame specific charges violates natural....
(1) Raison d’être of contempt jurisdiction is to maintain dignity of institution of Judicial Fora – It is not a vindictive exercise nor are inappropriate statements by themselves capable of lowering ....
Sufficient opportunity granted to the contemner for filing a reply is crucial in determining the maintainability of a criminal contempt reference.
The judgment highlights the gravity of contempt for derogatory statements against judicial authority, emphasizing accountability under the Contempt of Courts Act.
The act of fabricating and filing documents on behalf of the Union of India by an individual constitutes criminal contempt and is punishable under the Contempt of Courts Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the acceptance of an unconditional apology in a contempt case and the responsibility of the Advocate-on-Record in verifying the complete petition b....
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
