Disposed

In Re v. Himanshu Nigam, Advocate and Others

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2019CRCL/2/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment records a criminal contempt application against four advocates for causing commotion and disorder in a Sub Court bench. After affixing notices and hearing representations, the court accepted unconditional apologies and ordered the discharge of the contempt proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with discharge of the contempt application proceedings upon acceptance of unconditional apologies.

In Re Vs Himanshu Nigam, Advocate and Others — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 2 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- In Re Opposite Party :- Himanshu Nigam, Advocate And Others Counsel for Applicant :- A.G.A.,Sudhir Mehrotra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Rakesh Dubey,Rakesh Dubey,Ramesh Chandra Agrahari,Sanjay Srivastava,A/R0988

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, Special Counsel for the High Court; Sri Rakesh Dubey for the contemnor-opposite party nos. 3 and 4 (Upendra @ Pappu Sachan & Jyotendra Dixit, Advocates); Sri Sanjay Srivastava for the contemnor-opposite party no.2 (Hemendra Srivastava, Advocate); Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrahari for the contemnor opposite party no.1 (Himanshu Nigam, Advocate); and have perused the record.

¶6

These contempt proceedings were drawn on a reference letter dated 28th April, 2018 sent by Sri Rajat Singh Jain, I/c District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar stating that on 28.04.2018 in the absence of District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar while he was incharge of the district judiciary and had started hearing bail applications at 11 A.M., the bail application of Himanshu Nigam, Advocate (contemnor-opposite party no.1) was called out in respect of Case Crime No. 106 of 2018, P.S. Bithoor, District Kanpur Nagar. At that time, the D.G.C. (Crl.) informed the Court that medical papers of the victim have not been sent by the police and therefore the matter be adjourned as a result 30.04.2018 was fixed. Upon which, the contemnor-opposite party no.2 (Hemendra Srivastava-Advocate) appearing for the applicant insisted that the bail be heard on that day itself. Apart from that several other advocates started shouting. It is stated that Jyotendra Dixit (contemnor-opposite party no.4) and Sri Upendra @ Pappu Sachan (contemnor-opposite party no.3) started raising slogans and insisted that the court should pass a favorable order. There were some other advocates who tried to pacify them but they did not calm down. It is stated that some advocates went outside the courtroom and collected a gathering of 100-150 advocates causing commotion, as a consequence whereof, he had to retire to his chamber.

¶7

On the said reference letter, on 01st April, 2019, notices were issued to the contemnor-opposite parties, fixing 20.05.2019.

¶8

On 20.05.2019, the contemnor-opposite parties appeared in person before the Court and tendered unconditional apology on affidavit.

¶9

Upon which, on 20.05.2019, the Court passed the following order:-

¶10

"All the contemnors are present in the Court and Himanshu Nigam, opposite party no. 1 has engaged Sri Ramesh Chandra, Advocate, Hemendra Srivastava, opposite party no. 2 has engaged Sri Sanjai Srivastava Advocate and Upendra @ Pappu Sachan and Jyotendra Dixit, opposite party nos. 3 and 4 have engaged Sri Rakesh Dubey, Advocate. They have filed their affidavits tendering unconditional apology before this Court. They are permitted to tender their unconditional apology before A.D.J. concerned within 10 days.

¶11

The Additional District Judge shall submit his report in the matter.

¶12

List on 4.7.2019.

¶13

The personal appearance of all the contemnors are exempted."

¶14

Pursuant to the order dated 20.05.2019, the office has submitted a report dated 03.07.2019 stating that the Additional Sessions Judge has submitted his report dated 24.06.2019 with regard to submission of unconditional written apology by the contemnor-opposite parties before him.

¶15

We have perused the report dated 24.06.2019 submitted by Sri Rajat Singh Jain, the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Kanpur Nagar wherein it has been stated that all the four contemnor-opposite parties, namely, Sri Himanshu Nigam, Advocate, Sri Hemendra Srivastava, Advocate, Sri Upendra @ Pappu Sachan, Advocate, and Sri Jyotendra Dixit, Advocate, have submitted their unconditional written apology in his Chamber. Copy of the written apologies have been sent along with his report.

¶16

Having noticed the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping in mind that unconditional apologies have already been submitted by the contemnor-opposite parties both here as well as before the presiding officer concerned, we accept the unconditional apology and deem it appropriate to drop the proceedings. Notices are accordingly discharged. Let the record be consigned.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.7.2019 Sunil Kr Tiwari

In Re v. Himanshu Nigam, Advocate and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

In Re v. Himanshu Nigam, Advocate and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rekha Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Dharm Singh Vs State

Natthu Lal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Gaurav @ Gora Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Dambar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others