TMI Blog1991 (9) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which were published in the news papers all over the country. This led to tremors in the Bench and the Bar throughout the whole country. The incident undermined the dignity of courts in the country, Judicial Officers, Judges and Magistrates all over the country were in a state of shock, they felt insecure and humiliated and it appeared that instead of Rule of Law there was Police Raj in Gujarat. A number of Bar Associations passed Resolutions and went on strike. The Delhi Judicial Service Association, the All India Judges Association, Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, Judicial Service of Gujarat and many others approached the Apex Court by means of telegrams and petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for Saving the dignity and honour of the judiciary. On 29.9.1989, this Court took cognizance of the matter by issuing notices to the State of Gujarat and other Police Officers. The Court appealed to the Members of the Bar and Judiciary to resume work to avoid inconvenience to the litigant public. Subsequently, a number of petitions were filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for taking action against the Police Officers and also for quashing the criminal pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the cases against-those persons. Sharma reacted strongly to Patel s direction and he made complaint against the CJM to the Registrar of the High Court through District Superintendent of Police. These facts show that there was hostility between the Police of Nadiad and the CJM. On 25.9. 1989, S.R. Sharma met Patel, CJM in his Chambers to discuss the case of one Jitu Sport where the Police had failed to submit charge-sheet within 90 days. During discussion Sharma invited the CJM to visit the Police Station to see the papers and further his visit would mollify the sentiments of the Police Officials. It is alleged that at 8.35 p.m. Sharma sent a Police Jeep at Patel s residence, and on that vehicle Patel went to the Police Station. What actual happened at the Police Station is a matter of serious dispute between the parties. According to the CJM, he arrived in the Chamber of Sharma in the Police Station, he was forced to consume liquor and on his refusal he was assaulted, handcuffed and tied with rope by Sharma, Police Inspector, Sadia Sub-Inspector, Valjibhai Kalajibhai, Head Constable and Pratap Singh, Constable. It is further alleged that Patal was sent to Hospital for Medical exami ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Sudhalkar, District Judge, to show cause as to why action should not be taken against them in view of the Report of Justice Sahai. The State Government was further directed to explain as to why action against D.K. Dhagal, DSP, S.R. Sharma, Police Inspector and other police officers had not been taken. On 13.2. 1990 a notice for contempt of this Court was issued to K. Dadabhoy on the same date in view of the findings recorded by Justice Sahai, notices for contempt of court were issued to Dr. Bhavsar and M.B. Savant, Mamlatdar, Nadiad also. in his affidavit, S.R. Sharma, Police Inspector has raised a number of objections to the findings recorded by the Commissioner. The objections are technical in nature, challenging the authority and jurisdiction of the Commissioner in collecting evidence and recording findings against him. Sharma has further stated in his objections that the Commissioner acted as if he was sitting in judgment over the case. Other Police Officers have also raised similar objections. We find no merit in the objections raised on behalf of Sharma, Police Inspector and other contemners. The Commissioner had been appointed by this Court to hold inquiry and submit his r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lleged by Sharma, Patel could not be drunk and there appears no reason as to why he would have assaulted Sharma as alleged by the Police. The circumstances as pointed out by the Commissioner fully justify the findings recorded against the Police Officers. It is settled law that even in a criminal trial, accused is convicted on circumstantial evidence in the absence of an eye witness, Learned Commissioner acted judicially in a fair and objective manner in holding the inquiry, he afforded opportunity to the affected Police Officers and other persons and submitted his Report based on good reasons in respect of his findings which are amply supported by the material on record. The Commissioner did a commendable job in a record time. After hearing arguments at length and on perusal of the statements recorded by the Commissioner and the documentary evidence submitted by the parties, and a careful scrutiny of the affidavits and objections filed in this Court, we find no valid ground to reject the wellreasoned findings recorded by the learned Commissioner. The Commissioner s Report runs into 140 pages, which is on record. The contemners and other respondents have failed to place any conv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contrary he interpolated the order, sent to him indicating that he was required to appear before the CJM on 23.9.1989, which was admittedly a holiday. (4) On 25th September, 1989, Sharma met the CJM in his Chamber and as a pretext requested him to come to the Police Station to see the papers which could not be brought to the Court, as that could satisfy him that the Police was doing the needful for complying with the orders of the Court. Sharma pleaded with CJM that his visit to Police Station will remove the feeling of confrontation between the Police and Magistracy. The CJM agreed to visit the Police Station and Sharma offered to send police jeep to CJM s house for bringing him to the Police Station. (5) On 25.9.89 after the Court hours the CJM went to the officers club where he remained in the company of Sudhalkar, District Judge and Pande, Civil Judge till 8,30 p.m. Thereafter, he went to his residence. A Police jeep came to his residence at about 8.40 p.m. in the Officers Colony, he went on that Police jeep to the Police Station situated at a distance of about 2 kms. Patel had not consumed liquor before he went to the Police Station. (6) The Police version that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JM PateI, justifying his arrest and detention. (9) On examination at the Civil Hospital Patel s body was found to have a number of injuries. The injury on the left eye was very clear which appeared to have been caused by external force. His body had bruises and abrasions which could be caused by fists and blows. While in the casualty ward of the Civil Hospital, Patel requested the Doctors to contact the District Judge and inform him about the incident. Dr. Parashar tried to ring up the District Judge but he was prevented from doing so by Sharma and other Police Officers who were present there. Dr. Parashar and Dr. Bhavsar found the speech of Patel normal, gait steady, he was neither violent, nor he misbehaved. His blood was taken for chemical examination but the Forms used were not according to the rules and the blood was not taken in accordance with procedure prescribed by the Rules and the Circulars issued by the Director of Medical Services, Gujarat. The chemical examination of the blood sample taken in the Civil Hospital was not correctly done. The blood sample was analysed by a teenager who was not a testing officer within the Bombay Prohibition Act and necessary precau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f taking corrective measures in the service of processes, he became party along with Sharma in forwarding his complaint to the High Court against Patel s order in a judicial matter. The incident which took place in the night of 25/26 September 1989, had the blessing of Dhagal. He did not take any immediate action in the matter instead he created an alibi for himself alleging that he had gone to Lasundara and then to Balasinor Police Station and stayed there in a Government Rest House. The register at the Rest House indicating the entry regarding his stay was manipulated subsequently by making interpolation. On the direction of Additional Chief Secretary (Home) Dhagal submitted his report on 27.9. 1989 but in that report he did not make any reference of handcuffing and roping of the CJM although it was a matter of common knowledge and there was a great resentment among the judicial officers and the local public. Dhagal s complicity in the sordid episode is further fortified by the fact that he permitted Sharma, the main culprit of the entire episode to carry on investigation against Patel in the case registered against him by Sharma and also in the case registered by Patel against S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contemners. Mere issue of notice or pendency of contempt proceedings do not attract Art. 20(3) of the Constitution as the contemners against whom notices were issued were not accused of any offence. A criminal contempt is punishable by the superior courts by fine or imprisonment, but it has many characteristics which distinguishes it from ordinary offence. An offence under the criminal jurisdiction is tried by a Magistrate or a Judge and the procedure of trial is regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which provides as elaborate procedure for flaming of charges, recording of evidence, crossexamination, argument and the judgment. But charge of contempt is tried on summary process without any fixed procedure as the court is free to evolve its own procedure consistent with fair play and natural justice. In contempt proceedings unlike the trial for a criminal offence no oral evidence is ordinarily recorded and the usual practice is to give evidence by affidavits. Under the English Law a criminal offence is tried by criminal courts with the aid of Jury but a criminal contempt is tried by courts summarily without the aid and assistance of Jury. Ordinarily, process of trial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of the Criminal Procedure Code do not apply to contempt proceedings. Section 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure lays down that nothing contained in this Code shall, in the absence of a specific provision to the contrary, affect any special or local law for the time being in force, or any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form of procedure prescribed, by any other law for the time being in force. The power to take proceedings for the contempt of Court is an inherent power of a Court of record, the Criminal Procedure Code does not apply to such proceedings. Since, the contempt proceedings are not in the nature of criminal proceedings for an offence, the pendency of contempt proceedings cannot be regarded as criminal proceedings merely because it may end in imposing punishment on the contemner. A contemner is not in the position of an accused, it is open to the Court to cross-examine the contemner and even if the contemner is found to be guilty of contempt, the Court may accept apology and discharge the notice of contempt, whereas tendering of apology is no defence to the trial of a criminal offence. This peculiar feature distinguishes contempt proceedings fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ariman further urged that in our country there is no court of universal jurisdiction, and the jurisdiction of all courts including Supreme Court is limited and this Court can not enlarge its jurisdiction. Shri Soli J. Sorabji learned Attorney General (as he then was) urged that power to punish contempt is a special jurisdiction which is inherent in a court of record. A superior court of record has inherent power to punish for contempt of itself and it necessarily includes and carries with it the power to punish for contempt committed in respect of subordinate or inferior courts. A superior court of record having power to correct the order of inferior court has power to protect that court by punishing those who interfere with the due administration of justice of the court. Articles 129 and 2 15 do not confer any additional jurisdiction on the Supreme Court and the High Court. The constitutional provisions as well as the legislative enactment The Contempt of Courts Act recognise and preserve the existing contempt jurisdiction and power of the court of record for punishing for contempt of subordinate or inferior courts. The Act has not affected or restricted the suo moto inherent po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Article 136 provides for special leave to appeal before the Supreme Court, notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 132, 133, 134 and 134A. Article 136 vests this Court with wide powers to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree determination sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India except a court or Tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the Armed Forces. The Court s appellate power under Article 136 is plenary, it may entertain any appeal by granting special leave against any order made by any Magistrate. Tribunal or any other subordinate court. The width and amplitude of the power is not affected by the practice and procedure followed by this Court in insisting that before invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution, the aggrieved party must exhaust remedy available under the law before the appellate authority or the High Court. Self imposed restrictions by this Court do not divest it of its wide powers to entertain any appeal, against any order or judgment passed by any court or Tribunal in the country without exhausting alternative remedy before t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shocks the conscience of the Court. But, within the restrictions imposed by itself, this Court has the undoubted power to interfere even with findings of fact, making no distinction between judgments of acquittal and conviction, if the High Court, in arriving at those findings, has acted perversely or otherwise improperly . With regard to the competence of a private party, distinguished from the State, to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution, the Court observed: Appellate power vested in the Supreme Court under Article136 of the Constitution is not to be confused with ordinary appellate power exercised by appellate courts and appellate tribunals under specific statutes. As we said earlier, it is a plenary power, exercisable outside the purview of ordinary law to meet the pressing demands of justice (vide Durga Shankar Mehta v. Thakur Raghuraj Singh,). Article 136 of the Constitution neither confers on anyone the right to invoke the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court nor inhibits anyone from invoking the Court s jurisdiction. The power is vested in the Supreme Court but the right to invoke the Court s jurisdiction is vested in no one. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eir truth is not to be questioned. Halsbury s Laws of England Vol. 10 page 319, states: Another manner of division is into courts of record and courts not of record. Certain Courts are expressly declared by statute to be courts of record. In the case of courts not expressly declared to be courts of record, the answer to the question whether a court is a court of record seems to depend in general upon whether it has power to fine or imprison, by statute or otherwise, for contempt of itself or other substantive offences; if it has such power, it seems that it is a court of record........ proceedings of a Court of record preserved in its archives are called records, and are conclusive evidence of that which is recorded therein. In England a superior court of record has been exercised power to indict a person for the contempt of its authority and also for the contempt of its subordinate and inferior courts in a summary manner without the aid and assistance of Jury. This power was conceded as a necessary attribute of a superior court of record under Anglo Saxon System of Jurisprudence. The concept of inherent power of the superior court of record to indict a person by summar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld the order of the High Court and observed that the High Courts in Indian Presidencies were superior courts of record, and the powers of the High Court as superior courts in India are the same as in England. The Privy Council further held that by common law every court of record was the sole and exclusive judge of what amounts to a contempt of court. In Sukhdev Singh Sodhi s case this Court considered the origin, history and development of the concept of inherent jurisdiction of a court of record in India. The Court after considering Privy Council and High Courts decisions held that the High Court being a court of record has inherent power to punish for contempt of subordinate courts. The Court further held that even after the codification of the law of contempt in India the High Court s jurisdiction as a court of record to initiate proceedings and take seisin of the matter remained uneffected by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926. Mr. Nariman contended that even if the Supreme Court is a court of record, it has no power to take action for the contempt of a Chief Judicial Magistrate s court as neither the Constitution nor any statutory provision confer any such jurisdiction or power ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 ALR 16 1 the House of Lords proceeded on the assumption that a court of record possesses protective jurisdiction to indict a person for interference with the administration of justice in the inferior courts but it refused to indict as it held that this protection is available to a court exercising judicial power of the State and not to a Tribunal even though the same may be inferior to the court of record. These authorities show that in England the power of the High Court to deal with the contempt of inferior court was based not so much on its historical foundation but on the High Court s inherent jurisdiction being a court of record having jurisdiction to correct the orders of those courts. In India prior to the enactment of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926, High Court s jurisdiction in respect of contempt of subordinate and inferior courts was regulated by the principles of Common Law of England. The High Courts in the absence of statutory provision exercised power of contempt to protect the subordinate courts on the premise of inherent power of a Court of Record. Madras High Court in the case of Venkat Rao, 21 Madras Law Journal 832 held that it being a court of record had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Court shall take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code. Section 3 of the Act restricted the punishment which could be passed by the High Court. Since doubt was raised whether the High Court as a court of record could punish contempt of itself and of courts subordinate to it if contempt was committed outside its territorial jurisdiction, the Parliament enacted the Contempt of Courts Act 1952 removing the doubt. Section 3 of the 1952 Act again reiterated and reaffirmed the power, authority and jurisdiction of the High Court in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it, as it existed prior to the enactment. It provided that every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, power and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it as it has and exercise in respect of contempt of itself. Section 5 further expanded the jurisdiction of the High Court for indicting a person in respect of contempt committed outside the local limits of its jurisdiction. The Parliamentary legi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontempts of courts and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto. Section 2 of the Act defines contempt of court including criminal contempt. Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 specify matters which do not amount to contempt and the defence which may be taken. Section 10 which relates to the power of High Court to punish for contempt of subordinate courts. Section 10 like Section 2 of 1926 Act and Section 3 of 1952 Act reiterates and reaffirms the jurisdiction and power of a High Court in respect of its own contempt and of subordinate courts. The Act does not confer any new jurisdiction instead it reaffirms the High Courts power and jurisdiction for taking action for the contempt of itself as well as of its subordinate courts. We have scanned the provisions of the 1971 Act, but we find no provision therein curtailing the Supreme Court s power with regard to contempt of subordinate courts, Section 15 on the other hand expressly refers to this Court s power for taking action for contempt of subordinate courts. Mr. Nariman contended that under Section 15 Parliament has exclusively conferred power on the High Court to punish for the contempt of subordinate courts. The legislative intent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on made by any officer as may be specified by the Government. Thus Section 15 prescribes modes for taking cognizance of criminal contempt by the High Court and Supreme Court, it is not a substantive provision conferring power or jurisdiction on the High Court or on the Supreme Court for taking action for the contempt of its subordinate courts. The whole object of prescribing procedural modes of taking cognizance in Section 15 is to safeguard the valuable time of the High Court and the Supreme Court being wasted by frivolous complaints of contempt of court. Section 15(2) does not restrict the power of the High Court to take cognizance of the contempt of itself or of a subordinate court on its own motion although apparently the Section does not say so. In S.K. Sarkar, Member, Board of Revenue, U.P. Lucknow v. Vinay Chandra Misra, [1981] 2 SCR 331 this Court held that Section 15 prescribed procedure for taking cognizance and it does not affect the High Court s suo moto power to take cognizance and punish for contempt of subordinate courts. Mr. Nariman urged that under Entry 77 of List I of the VIIth Schedule the Parliament has legislative competence to make law curtailing the juri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion, it is not permissible to adopt a construction which would render any expression superfluous or redundant. The courts ought not accept any such construction. While construing Article 129, it is not permissible to ignore the significance and impact of the inclusive power conferred on the Supreme Court. Since, the Supreme Court is designed by the Constitution as a court of record and as the Founding Fathers were aware that a superior court of record had inherent power to indict a person for the contempt of itself as well as of courts inferior to it, the expression including was deliberately inserted in the Article. Article 129 recognised the existing inherent power of a court of record in its full plenitude including the power to punish for the contempt of inferior courts. If Article 129 is susceptible to two interpretations, we would prefer to accept the interpretation which would preserve the inherent jurisdiction of this Court being the superior court of record, to safeguard and protect the subordinate judiciary, which forms the very back bone of administration of justice. The subordinate courts administer justice at the grass root level, their protection is necessary to pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f this Court. In Rata Soap Factory s case there was no issue before the Court regarding the inherent power of a superior court of record instead the entire case related to the interpretation of the statutory provisions conferring jurisdiction on the High Court. Where jurisdiction is conferred on a court by a statute, the extent of jurisdiction is limited to the extent prescribed under the statute- But there is no such limitation on a superior court of record in matters relating to the exercise of constitutional powers. No doubt this Court has appellate jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Act, but that does not divest it of its inherent power under Article 129 of the Constitution- The conferment of appellate power on the court by a statute does not and cannot affect the width and amplitude of inherent powers of this Court under Article 129 of the Constitution. We have already discussed a number of decisions holding that the High Court being a court of record has inherent power in respect of contempt of itself as well as of its subordinate courts even in the absence of any express provision in any Act. A fortiori the Supreme Court being the Apex Court of the country and superior ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Article 374(2) of the Constitution. Mr. Sorabji, learned Attorney- General seriously contested the proposition, he contended that there is a marked difference between the Federal Court and this Court, former being established by a statute with limited jurisdiction while this Court is the Apex constitutional court with unlimited jurisdiction, therefore, the Federal Court decisions are not binding on this Court. He urged that Article 374(2) does not bind this Court with the decisions of the Federal Court, instead it provides for meeting particular situation during transitory period. In the alternative learned Attorney-General urged that the aforesaid two decisions of Federal Court in Gauba s case and Jaitly s case do not affect the jurisdiction and power of this Court with regard to contempt of subordinate and inferior courts as the Federal Court had no occasion to interpret any provision like Article 129 of the Constitution in the aforesaid decisions. Article 374 made provision for the continuance of Federal Court Judges as the Judges of the Supreme Court on the commencement of the Constitution and it also made provisions for transfer of the proceedings pending in the Federal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State of Bihar v. Abdul Majid, [1954] SCR 786 at 795 and Shrinivas Krishnarao Kango v. Narayan Devji Kango and Ors. [1955] 1 SCR 1 at 24 and 25. Federal Court decisions were not followed by this Court. There is, therefore, no merit in the contention that this Court is bound by the decisions of the Federal Court. But even otherwise the decisions of Federal Court in K.L. Gauba s case and Purshottam Lal Jaitly s case have no bearing on the interpretation of Article 129 of the Constitution. In K.L. Gauba s case the facts were that K.L. Gauba, an Advocate of Lahore High Court was involved in litigation of various kinds including a case connected with his insolvency. A Special Bench of the High Court of Lahore was constituted to decide his matters. His objection against the sitting of a particular Judge on the Special Bench, was rejected. His application for the grant of certificate under Section 205 of the Government of India Act to file appeal against the order of the High Court before the Federal Court was refused. Gauba filed a petition before the Federal Court for the issue of direction for the transfer of his case to Federal Court from High Court. The Federal Court held that app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er anomalous con sequences. In the case of K.L. Gauba the Federal Court found itself helpless in the matter as the Government of India Act, 1935 did not confer any power on it to entertain an appeal against the order of High Court refusing to grant certificate. The decision has no bearing on the question which we are concerned. In Purshottam Lal Jaitly s case the decision turned on the interpretation of Section 210(2) of the 1935 Act. Section 2 10 made provisions for the enforcement of decrees and orders of Federal Court. Sub-section (2) provided that Federal Court shall have power to make any order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person, the discovery or production of any documents or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of court , which any High Court has power to make as respects the territory within its jurisdiction, and further the Federal Court shall have power to award costs and its orders shall be enforceable by all courts. While interpreting Section 2 10(2) the Federal Court held that it had no power to deal with contempt of any court subordinate to High Court and it further observed that the wider constructions may lead to conflicting jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the social, economic and political changes, need of the community and the independence of judiciary. The court cannot be a helpless spectator, bound by precedents of colonial days which have lost relevance. Time has come to have a fresh look to the old precedents and to lay down law with the changed perceptions keeping in view the provisions of the Constitution. Law , to use the words of Lord Coleridge, grows; and though the principles of law remain unchanged, yet their application is to be changed with the changing circumstances of the time. The considerations which weighed with the Federal Court in rendering its decision in Guaba s and Jaitley s case are no more relevant in the context of the constitutional provisions. Since this Court has power of judicial superintendence and control over all the courts and Tribunals functioning in the entire territory of the country, it has a corresponding duty to protect and safeguard the interest of inferior courts to ensure the flow of the stream of justice in the courts without any interference or attack from any quarter. The subordinate and inferior courts do not have adequate power under the law to protect themselves, therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere functioning of the subordinate courts all over the country was adversely affected, and the administration of justice was paralysed, therefore, this Court took cognizance of the matter. Mr. Nariman contended that in our country there is no court of universal jurisdiction, as the jurisdiction of all courts including the Supreme Court is limited. Article 129 as well as the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 do not confer,any express power to this Court with regard to contempt of the subordinate courts, this Court cannot by construing Article 129 assume jurisdiction in the matter which is not entrusted to it by law. He placed reliance on the observations of this Court in Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar Ors. v. State of Maharashtra Ors., [1966] 3 SCR 744 at 77 1. We have carefully considered the decision but we find nothing therein to support the contention of Mr. Nariman. It is true that courts constituted under a law enacted by the Parliament or the State Legislature have limited jurisdiction and they cannot assume jurisdiction in a matter, not expressly as signed to them, but that is not so in the case of a superior court of record constituted by the Constitution. Such a court does not hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the Magistracy in Kheda. The Chief Judicial Magistrate is head of the Magistracy in the District. Under the provisions of Chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, he exercises control and supervision over the investigating officer. He is-an immediate officer on the spot at the lower rung of the administration of justice of the country to ensure that the Police which is the law enforcing machinery acts according to law m investigation of crimes without indulging into excesses and causing harassment to citizens. The main objective of Police is to apprehend offenders, to investigate crimes and to prosecute them before the courts and also to prevent commission of crime and above all to ensure law and order to protect the citizens life and property. The law enjoins the Police to be scrupulously fair to the offender and the Magistracy is to ensure fair investigation and fair trial to an offender. The purpose and object of Magistracy and Police are complemen tary to each other. It is unfortunate, that these objectives have remained unfulfilled even after 40 years of our Constitution. Aberrations of Police officers and Police excesses in dealing with the law and order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had the power and privilege to apprehend and deal with a Chief Judicial Magistrate according to its sweet will. What was the purpose of unusual behaviour of the police, was it to secure safety and security of N.L. Patel, or was it done to prevent escape or any violent activity on his part justifying the placing of handcuffs and ropes on the body of N.L. Patel. The Commission has recorded detailed findings that the object was to wreck vengeance and to humiliate the CJM who had been policing the police by this judicial orders. We agree with the findings recorded by the Commission that there was no justification for this extraordinary and unusual behaviour of Police Inspector Sharma and other Police Officers although they made an attempt to justify their unprecedented, dehumanising behaviour on the ground that Patel was drunk, and he was behaving in violent manner and if he had not been handcuffed or tied with ropes, he could have snatched Sharma s revolver and killed him. We are amazed at the reasons given by Sharma justifying the handcuffs and ropes on the body of N.L. Patel. Patel was unarmed, he was at the Police Station in a room, there were at least seven police officials presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the administration of justice is not to safeguard or protect the dignity of the Judge or the Magistrate, but the purpose is to preserve the authority of the courts to ensure an ordered life in society. In AttOrney-General v. Times Newspapers, [1974] A.C. 273 at p. 302 the necessity for the law of contempt was summarised by Lord Morris as: In an ordered community courts are established for the pacific settlement of disputes and for the maintenance of law and order. In the general interests of the community it is imperative that the authority of the courts should not be imperilled and that recourse to them should not be subject to unjustifiable interference. When such unjustifiable interference is suppressed it is not because those charged with the responsibilities of adminis tering justice are concerned for their own dignity: it is because the very structure of ordered life is at risk if the recognised courts of the land are so flouted and their authority wanes and is supplanted. The Chief Judicial Magistrate is head of the Magistracy in the District who administers justice to ensure, protect and safeguard the rights of citizens. The subordinate courts at the district ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emners contempt is made out. On behalf of the petitioners it was urged that the Police Officers conduct amounts to criminal contempt as their action lowered the authority of the Chief Judicial Magistrate and it further caused interference with the administration of justice. Mr. Soli Sorabjee, learned Attorney-General contended that all those who abetted and helped the Police Officers in their conduct and design are also guilty of contempt of court. On behalf of the contemners it was urged that the incident which took place in the Police Station does not make out any contempt of court. The Chief Judicial Magistrate had consumed liquor and in druken state he went to the Police Station and slapped the Police Inspector, Sharma, thereby he committed offence under the Bombay Prohibition Act as well as under Section 332, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal cases have been registered against N.L. Patel, CJM and after investigation charge-sheets have been submitted to the court. In this context, it was urged that no action could be taken against the contemners as the facts in issue in the present proceedings are the same as involved in the criminal prosecutions pending against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ier, show that though D.K. Dhagal, had not personally participated in the shameful episode but his Conduct, act and omission establish his complicity in the incident. It is difficult to believe or imagine that a Police Inspector would arrest, humiliate, assault and handcuff a CJM and the Police Chief in the District would be indifferent, or a mute spectator. The circumstances unequivocally show that Sharma was acting under the protective cover of Dhagal as he did not take any immediate action in the matter instead he created an alibi for himself by interpolating the entries in the register at the Government Rest House, Balasinor. In his report submitted to the Addl. Chief Secretary (Home) on 27.9.1989, Dhagal did not even remotely mention the handcuffing and roping of CJM. It is unfortunate that Dhagal as the district Superintendent of Police did not discharge his duty like a responsible Police Officer instead he identified himself with Sharma, Police Inspector and actively abetted the commission of onslaught on the CJM. We, accordingly, hold D.K. Dhagal, the then D.S.P. Kheda guilty of contempt of court. This takes us to the petition filed by N.L. Patel for quashing the crimina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and D.K. Dhagal, D.S.P. guilty of contempt of court. These very persons are specified as witnesses in the two charge sheets. The Commission s as well as our findings clearly demonstrate that the allegations contained in the two FIRs are false. If Police is permitted to prosecute Patel on those allegations merely on the basis that charge sheets have been submitted by it, it would amount to gross abuse of the process of the Court. In the circumstances, proceedings against N.L. Patel are liable to be quashed. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the State of Gujarat and the Police Officers, urged that in the present proceedings this Court has no jurisdiction or power to quash the criminal proceedings pending against N.L. Patel, CJM. Elaborating his contention, learned counsel submitted that once a criminal case is registered against a person the law requires that the court should allow the case to proceed to its normal conclusion and there should be no interference with the process of trial. He further urged that this Court has no power to quash a trial pending before the criminal court either under the Code of Criminal Procedure or under the Constitution, therefore, the crimi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceeding in court including civil or criminal. The inherent power of this Court under Article 142 coupled with the plenary and residuary powers under Article 32 and 136 embraces power to quash criminal proceedings pending before any court to do complete justice in the matter before this Court. If the court is satisfied that the proceeding in a criminal case are being utilised for oblique purposes or if the same are continued on manufactured and false evidence or if.no case is made out on the admitted facts, it would be in the ends of justice to set aside or quash the criminal proceedings. It is idle to suggest that in such a situation this Court should be a helpless spectator. Mr. Nariman urged that Article 142(1) does not contemplate any order contrary to Statutory provisions. He placed reliance on the Court s observations in Prem Chand Garg v. Excise Commissioner. U.P. Allahabad, [1963] Supp. 1 SCR 885 at 899 and, A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak Anr. [1988] 2 SCC 602 where the Court observed that though the powers conferred on this Court under Article 142(1) are very wide, but in exercise of that power the court cannot make any order plainly inconsistent with the express statut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Court in State of U.P. v. Poosu Anr. [1976] 3 SCR 1005; Ganga Bishan Ors. v. Jai Narain, [1986] 1 SCC 75; Navnit R. Kamani Ors. v. R.R. Kamani, [1988] 4 SCC 387; B.N. Nagarajan Ors. v. State of Mysore Ors., [1966] 3 SCR 682: Special Reference No. I of 1964, (supra), and Harbans Singh v. State of U,P. Ors. (supra). Since the foundation of the criminal trial of N.L. Patel is based on the facts which have already been found to be false, it would be in the ends of justice and also to do complete justice in the cause to quash the criminal proceedings. We accordingly quash the criminal proceedings pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad in Criminal Cases Nos. 1998/90 and 1999/ 90. The question arises what punishment should be awarded to the contemners found guilty of contempt. In determining the punishment, the degree and the extent of part played by each of the contemners has to be kept in mind. Sharma, Police Inspector who was the main actor in the entire incident and who had planned the entire episode with a view to humiliate the CJM in the publis eye is the main culprit, therefore, he deserves maximum punishment. Sadia, Sub-Inspector took active part in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... news as a routine matter without taking any steps to ascertain the correct facts or effective action against the erring Police Officers. If the head of the Police administration in the State exhibits such indifference to a sensitive matter which shook the entire judicial machinery in the State, nothing better could be expected from his subordinate officers. K. Dadabhoy did not act like a responsible officer. The State Government should take action against him departmentaly on the basis of the findings recorded by the Commission. The State Government has initiated proceedings against other erring officers in respect of whom the Commission has adversely commented, we would make it clear that discharge of contempt notices does not absolve those officers of their misconduct, the State Government is directed to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings for taking appropriate action against them. We are constrained to observe that the State Government did not immediately take effective steps against the erring officials. In spite of the direction issued by this Court the erring Police Officers were neither arrested nor placed under suspension. It was only after this Court took serious vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e provided to the Judicial Officer to communication with his family members, legal advisers and Judicial Officers, including the District Sessions Judge. (F) No statement of a Judicial Officer who is under arrest be recorded nor any panchnama be drawn up nor any medical tests be conducted except in the presence of the Legal Adviser of the Judicial Officer concerned or another Judicial Office of equal or higher rank, it available. (G) There should be no handcuffing of a Judicial Officer. If, however, violent resistance to arrest is offered or there is imminent need to effect physical arrest in order to avert danger to life and limb, the person resisting arrest may be over-powered and handcuffed. In such case, immediate report shall be made to the District Sessions Judge concerned and also to the Chief Justice of the High Court. But the burden would be on the Police to establish necessity for effecting physical arrest and handcuffing the Judicial Officer and if it be established that the physical arrest and handcuffing of the Judicial Officer was unjustified, the Police Officers causing or responsible for such arrest and handcuffing would be guilty of misconduct and would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
