9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Contempt of Court - Letter sent to presiding Judge containing imputation, threat, and insult. Apology tendered at a belated stage. Deliberate and cool planning of hardened litigant. Lack of remorse or contrition shown by the opposite party. Judge's duty to protect independence and impartiality of the judiciary. Analysis: The judgment by the Bombay High Court, delivered by Justice Vivian Bose, addresses a reference made by a Subordinate Judge regarding an incident of contempt committed against the presiding Judge of that Court. The case involved a civil suit where the defendants were found to have set up a forged will, leading to the plaintiff's claim being decreed in full. Subsequently, the judgment-debtors, including the opposite party, attempted to set up an adjustment of the decree but failed to provide evidence, resulting in dismissal of the application. The opposite party then sent a threatening letter to the presiding Judge, accusing him of unlawful actions and threatening consequences if the opposite party succeeded in appeal. The Court viewed this as a serious contempt, containing imputations against the Judge's integrity and impartiality, which are crucial for the administration of justice to remain independent and unbiased. The judgment emphasizes the importance of genuine contrition in the face of contemptuous behavior. It criticizes the belated apology tendered by the opposite party's counsel, highlighting that an apology should not be used as a last-minute defense tactic but should be offered sincerely and unconditionally at the earliest possible stage. The Court clarifies that an apology is not a mere formality but should reflect a true acknowledgment of wrongdoing and a desire to make amends. The judgment underscores that a lack of contrition and a deliberate, planned act of contempt by a knowledgeable litigant cannot be taken lightly, especially when aimed at intimidating or coercing a Judge to achieve personal gains through improper means. Furthermore, the judgment addresses the legal aspect of contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, clarifying that the offenses punishable as contempt of Court under the Penal Code do not form a bar in cases of contempt of Court under the Act. Considering the value of the property involved in the suit and the circumstances of the case, the Court imposes a fine of Rs. 500 on the opposite party for contempt, with a default sentence of 6 weeks simple imprisonment under the Contempt of Courts Act of 1926. This decision aims to uphold the dignity of the judiciary, protect Judges from intimidation, and send a clear message that contemptuous behavior will not be tolerated.
|
