[2025:RJ-JD:18651-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Civ. Contempt Pet. No. 26/2024 Anand Swaroop Vyas son of Shri Murli Dhar Ji Vyas, aged about 76 Years, Profession Advocate, R/1360/2010 resident of 36 Kailash Puri, Opposite Mahaveer Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Pin 301018), Rajasthan. Mobile No. 9414541227, 8209523519 Email Anandvyas 76@gmail.com ----Petitioner Versus Minaxi Vyas, Leanred Civil Judge, Civil Judge East And Judicial Magistrate Court, Bhilwara.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anand Swaroop Vyas, Petitioner, Present in Person For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL

Order

16/04/2025 The petitioner has filed this Civil Contempt Petition purportedly under section 16 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the Judicial Officer making an allegation that the said Judicial Officer did not exceed to his prayer for sending the will dated 26^th May 2006 for forensic examination.

2. Section 2 of Contempt of Courts Act which defines the expression “contempt” provides as under:-

“2. Definition. In this act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (a) Contempt of Court means civil contempt or criminal contempt;

(b) Civil contempt means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court;

(c) Criminal contempt means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which -

(i) Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or (ii) Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or (iii) Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner;

(d) High Court means the High Court for a State or a Union territory, and includes the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union territory.”

3. In the order dated 4^th October 2021 passed in Case No.79 of 2012, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.1 at Bhilwara issued certain directions for police investigation. Later on, on 10^th February 2023 a separate order was passed by the Court in Case No.30 of 2011 titled “Chandra Prakash v. Anand Swaroop” in which an observation has been made that the counter-claim made by the defendant shall be decided as per law.

4. Mr. Anand Swaroop Vyas, the petitioner appearing in person refers to the decision by the Patna High Court, wherein a learned Judge while dealing with the issue of undue delay in verifying the bail bonds made an observation that such delaying tactics shall amount to contempt, and submits that this Court may draw a proceeding against the Judicial Officer under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

5. Having regard to the allegations made in the present contempt case, we are of the opinion that the proceeding against the Judicial Officer who has been made respondent shall not lie and the present contempt petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. Any observation made by the learned Judge in “Brijendra Narayan Choudhary & Anr. v. S.M. Singh & Anr.” 1966 SCC OnLine Pat. 183 shall not lay any foundation for proceeding further in this contempt case.

7. Therefore, while dismissing the present contempt petition, we leave it open to the petitioner to avail of remedy as available to him in law.

(SUNIL BENIWAL),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J

61-Anshul/-