An intra-court appeal against an order in contempt proceedings is only maintainable if the court oversteps its jurisdiction by adjudicating the merits of the underlying dispute. Where a court merely declines to initiate contempt proceedings without addressing substantive rights, no such appeal lies.

JUDGMENT :

SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.

The present Special Appeal has been filed by the appellant under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules, 1952’) against the order dated August 13, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Contempt Application No. 3201 of 2024 whereby the learned Single Judge disposed of the contempt application on the ground that proceeding under Section 379 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’ ; formerly Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) has already been filed and is pending before the trial court.

FACTS

1. The factual matrix giving rise to the present special appeal has been delineated below:

a. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent, Sonakshi Verma was solemnized on February 15, 2021 in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals. Disputes arose soon thereafter which led respondent to file multiple cases against the appellant and his family members, including maintenance application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘DV Act’) registered as Case No. 3288 of 2022 (P.S. Aliganj, Lucknow) before the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Lucknow.

b. In the said proceedings, the respondent filed an Affidavit of Assets and Liabilities (A.O.A.) dated June 27, 2022 in accordance with the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha reported in AIR 2021 SC 569. In the said affidavit, the respondent stated her income as “NA” (Non-Applicable) and stated “NA” against properties/assets even though the respondent at that time was a serving judicial officer of the Bihar Judiciary (Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate-I, presently posted as Registrar, Bihar Land Tribunal, Patna).

c. The maintenance application was decided ex-parte against the appellant on November 2, 2023, whereby maintenance of Rs.10,000 per month was granted10,000 per month was granted alongwith a restraint order in respect of a matrimonial house and compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-.

d. Aggrieved by allegedly false affidavit filed by the respondent in maintenance proceedings, the appellant initiated proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. by filing Misc. Application No. 83439 of 2024 before the court of ACJ (J.D.) (Crime Against Women) F.T.C. 50.

e. Thereafter, the appellant also filed Contempt Application (Civil) No. 3201 of 2024 before this Hon’ble Court, seeking initiation of contempt against the respondent for deliberately filing a false affidavit in violation of the mandate given in Rajnesh v. Neha (Supra), which expressly provides that false statements and misrepresentations in maintenance affidavits may invite proceedings under Section 340 Cr.P.C. and contempt of court. The learned Single Judge disposed of the contempt application by the judgment and order dated August 13, 2024 without recording any finding whether prima facie contempt was made out or not and directed the appellant to pursue the application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. before the learned trial court. It is this judgmnet dated 13.08.2024, which has been impugned in the present intra-court appeal.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has made the following submissions:

a. The learned Single Judge erred in failing to dec