31 July 2019 5:15 PM GMT
The Calcutta High Court punished a writ petitioner in suo moto contempt proceedings initiated against him for use of disgraceful and unparliamentary language in his petition.The Petitioner approached the high court, seeking arrest of a foreign national, enlarged on bail, in a long pending criminal case filed by him. Therein, he alleged the high court administration of personal...
The Calcutta High Court punished a writ petitioner in suo moto contempt proceedings initiated against him for use of disgraceful and unparliamentary language in his petition.
The Petitioner approached the high court, seeking arrest of a foreign national, enlarged on bail, in a long pending criminal case filed by him. Therein, he alleged the high court administration of personal bias and tampering records and subsequently went on to use unwarranted and scandalous words against the judges of both the high court and the courts subordinate.
The court enlightened the Petitioner that the appropriate remedy in his matter would have been to file for cancellation of bail. Further, on scrutiny it was found that the allegations of personal bias and tampering of records leveled by him against the court administration were unsubstantiated from the records of the case. Consequently, the court took suo moto cognizance of the scandalous language used in the writ petition and initiated contempt proceedings against him.
It was found that the Petitioner was a high school pass and had the assistance of his sister (English Hons. pass) and some lawyers in drafting the petition. Hence, the court concluded that the Petitioner was fully aware of the malign imputations entailed in the petition and was liable to be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Justice Rajasekhar Mantha held that "…allegations made by the petitioner against the subordinate Judges and Judges of this Court, past and present, as also other Officials in bad taste, scandalous, deliberately and willfully contumacious. Statements in pleadings of this nature, have the consequence of maligning the high dignity of this court in the eyes of the public at large." Accordingly, he was sentenced to five days simple imprisonment or to plant 50 trees in lieu of undergoing sentence.
The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Shakti Sankar Bagchi and the high court administration by Advocates Siddhartha Banerjee and Piyush Biswas.
Click Here To Download Judgment