IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.2326 of 2021

Date of decision: 9^th November, 2021

Rakesh Kumar Jakhar

… Petitioner

Versus

Geeta Bharti & others

… Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE FATEH DEEP SINGH

Present:

Mr. Pardeep Solath, Advocate for the petitioner.

FATEH DEEP SINGH, J.

The present petitioner Rakesh Kumar Jakhar along with his

co-petitioner Azad Singh had filed a civil writ petition under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in the nature

of certiorari, mandamus or any other writ seeking quashment of the

impugned public notice dated 03.08.2021 issued by the Jhajjar Central

Cooperative Bank Ltd., Jhajjar whereby Zonal Committees were

constituted for the election to the Board of Directors of the Jhajjar

Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., being contrary to the law. It was during

the course of proceedings, on 08.10.2021 learned counsel for the

respondent No.3 Zonal Committee for Election of the Board of Directors

made a statement before this Court which is recorded in orders dated

08.10.2021 (Annexure P1) and is reproduced as below to law emphasis:-

“Learned counsel representing respondent

No.3, on instructions from Registrar Co-operative

RATTAN PAL SINGH

2021.11.15 15:28

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

Punjab & Haryana High Court

COCP No.2326 of 2021

2

Societies has apprised the Court that as on today, no

final decision for conducting the elections of Jhajjar

Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Jhajjar has been

taken.”

It is subsequent thereto, the present petitioner filed instant

petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (in short,

‘the Act’) against the respondents for willfully disobeying and neglecting

order dated 08.10.2021 whereby process for elections was set into

motion, and hence claimed that there has been disobedience of the orders

of the Court and statement made before it, necessitates initiation of

contempt proceedings.

Upon hearing learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.Pardeep

Solath, Advocate and perusal of the records. The definition of ‘Contempt

of Court’ as enunciated under the Act falls broadly into two categories

‘Civil Contempt’ and ‘Criminal Contempt’. ‘Civil Contempt’ as per the

definition assigned under Section 2(b) of the Act 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.

The primary grouse of the petitioner is breach of an undertaking made

before this Court which is reflected in the orders dated 08.10.2021

(Annexure P1).

On perusal of the records shows that the counsel for the then

respondent No.3 has apprised the Court that on the date when he made

the statement in Court no final decision for conducting the elections of

the Bank had been taken and it is nowhere elicited that no elections are

RATTAN PAL SINGH

2021.11.15 15:28

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

Punjab & Haryana High Court

COCP No.2326 of 2021

3

going to be held. It was at that point of time no formal decision was taken

by the then respondents as to holding of elections to the Bank. It was

subsequent thereto at that point of time, it was decided to hold elections

on 28.11.2021 and therefore the respondents cannot be attributed any

deliberate mis-statement or undermining the sanctity of this Court by this

wilful disobedience. Rather what could one perceive that there are

bickerings and wranglings within the different sets of politically aligned

persons in the area who are out-and-out to take revenge and vengeance.

To the specific query of the Court how there is wilful disobedience by the

respondents to the Court, is not at all elaborated from the order which

forms the very axis on which the petitioner has tried to revolve his case.

This Court does not feel inclined to show indulgence. The contempt

pe