A contempt petition must establish willful disobedience with clear particulars; otherwise, it lacks jurisdiction and cannot sustain a conviction.

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta )

This appeal has been filed against the judgment and sentence of the learned single Judge dated 16^th December 2013, in a contempt proceedings. The learned single Judge has awarded maximum punishment envisaged under Section 12 (1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter the Act) by sentencing the appellant/contemnor to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of six months and with a fine of Rs.2,000/-.

The contempt proceedings are always between the alleged contemnor and the Court. This contempt proceedings has arisen, pursuant to the application made by the respondent herein. The order, violation of which is complained, is as follows:

“Pending further orders, respondent No.10 is restrained from alienating or in any manner encumbering the suit schedule property in favour of third parties.”

In the contempt application, it is stated that in disobedience of the aforesaid order, as many as 18 conveyances have been executed by the appellant (who was respondent No.10 in Civil Revision Case) to alienate the suit schedule property in favour of eighteen several third parties. The aforesaid fact of execution of conveyances for alienating the property has been admitted in the counter-affidavit. It is also admitted that these conveyances are executed in breach of the aforesaid interim order. Any one can think that the contempt proceedings and conviction is a matter of course in given case of this nature, and perhaps it was the understanding of the learned single Judge also as reflected from the impugned order.

Learned Counsel for the appellant says that the conviction is not in accordance with due process of law.

We agree with the aforesaid contention. It is well settled that constitutional mandate provides procedure safeguard that even a criminal of heinous crime is to be brought to book in accordance with the procedure established by law. We have to see whether this constitutional mandate has been observed in this case or not noting contention of the learned lawyer for the appellant. Contempt proceedings are of two kinds, namely, civil and criminal. It appears from the statement and nature of the fact disclosed in the petition, it is a case of civil contempt. The definition of the Civil Contempt provided under Section 2 (b) of the Act is as follows:

“Civil Contempt means willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a Court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a Court.”

Therefore, while making the application for contempt in this Court, there must be a prima facie allegation of willful disobedience to order of the Court in this case. Moreover, the Rules framed by this Court provides for requirements to plead in the petition for charging a person of commission of contempt. Rule 7 of the Contempt of Courts (Andhra Pradesh High Court) Rules, 1980 is as follows:

“7. (1) Every petition under rule 5 (b) and (c) shall contain:

(a) the name, description and place of residence of the petitioner or petitioners and of the person charged;

(b) the nature and details of the contempt alleged, and such material facts, including the date or dates of commission of the alleged contempt, as may be necessary for the proper determination of the case;

(c) the details of the petition previously made by the petitioner on the same facts, if any, and the result thereof.

(2) Where the petitioner relies upon a document or documents in his possession or power and refers to them in the petition in support thereof, he shall file such document or documents or true copies thereof duly authenticated along with the petition.

(3) No Court-fee shall be payable on the petition or on any document filed in the contempt proceedings.

Therefore, the procedure established by law, as it could be culled out from the aforesaid legal provision, in the contempt application, there must be a clear prima facie case of willful, deliberate violation of the order with particulars a