Case Note & Summary
The present criminal contempt petition was filed by Ashok Govindrao Bilolikar, the II Adhoc Additional District and Sessions Judge at Parbhani, under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking action against respondent No. 1, Ramchandra Kisanrao Kagne, an advocate practicing at Parbhani Court. The respondent was representing an accused in Sessions Case No. 52 of 2001 under Section 376(2)(f) IPC, tried by the petitioner. After recording prosecution evidence and the accused's statement under Section 313 CrPC, the matter was kept for final arguments on 7 October 2005. The petitioner heard arguments and began dictating judgment around 12 noon, dictating up to the point of holding the accused guilty. Transcription and checking continued until 5:00-5:15 p.m., after which the accused was called for submissions on sentence. At that point, the respondent got up, started shouting loudly, snatched the stenographer Mr. Ugle's notebook, and flung it in court, hitting the head of the learned APP Mr. R. R. Sharma. The peon Mr. Gaikwad retrieved the notebook and handed it back. Despite the petitioner's requests to keep calm, the respondent threatened, 'He would see, how judgment is given. Bullying of the Court will not be tolerated. Fool Magistrate.' The court found that this conduct clearly amounts to criminal contempt as defined under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as it scandalizes the court and obstructs the administration of justice. The respondent was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month and a fine of Rs. 2,000, in default further simple imprisonment for 15 days.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Criminal Contempt - Section 15(2) read with Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Advocate's disruptive conduct in court - The respondent-advocate, while representing an accused in a sessions trial, shouted, snatched the stenographer's notebook, flung it hitting the APP, and threatened the judge saying 'Fool Magistrate' - Held that such conduct amounts to criminal contempt as it scandalizes the court and obstructs the administration of justice (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conduct of the respondent-advocate in shouting, snatching a stenographer's notebook, flinging it, and threatening the presiding officer amounts to criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Final Decision
The court convicted the respondent under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for one month and a fine of Rs. 2,000, in default further simple imprisonment for 15 days.
Law Points
- Criminal contempt
- scandalizing court
- obstructing administration of justice
- Section 15(2) Contempt of Courts Act
- 1971
- Section 2(c) Contempt of Courts Act
