Case Note & Summary
The present contempt petition was filed by the complainants under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging that the accused-contemnor had willfully and deliberately disobeyed the interim order dated 22.11.2012 passed by this Court in RSA No.553/2012. The complainants contended that despite the interim order restraining the accused from interfering with their possession and from making any construction on the suit property, the accused had constructed a wall, thereby violating the order. The accused denied the allegations and submitted that the construction, if any, was prior to the order and that they had no knowledge of the order. The court analyzed the evidence on record and found that the complainants had not produced any material to establish that the accused had knowledge of the interim order or that the construction was carried out after the order. The court observed that for an act to constitute contempt, there must be willful and deliberate disobedience, and the burden of proof lies on the complainant. Since the complainants failed to discharge this burden, the court held that no case of contempt was made out. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Sections 11 and 12 Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - The complainants alleged that the accused violated an interim order dated 22.11.2012 in RSA No.553/2012 by constructing a wall on the suit property. The court examined whether the disobedience was willful and deliberate. Held that the complainants failed to prove that the accused had knowledge of the order or that the construction was done after the order. The contempt petition was dismissed as the ingredients of contempt were not satisfied (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the accused-contemnor is guilty of willful and deliberate disobedience of the interim order dated 22.11.2012 passed in RSA No.553/2012, warranting punishment under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Final Decision
The contempt petition is dismissed. The court held that the complainants failed to prove willful and deliberate disobedience of the interim order, and therefore, no case for contempt is made out.
Law Points
- Contempt of Courts Act
- 1971
- Sections 11 and 12
- Willful disobedience
- Interim order
- Burden of proof
- Mens rea
