Disposed

Smt. Vandana Thakur v. Shri Rahul Kumar, Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2020CAPL/1729/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court held prima facie case of civil contempt against opposite parties for non-compliance of a high court order under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and granted a final break of three months for compliance. The applicant may file a fresh application if non-compliance persists.

What did the court decide?

Order disposed with liberty to move fresh application if order not complied with within three months.

Smt. Vandana Thakur Vs Shri Rahul Kumar, Ist Additional… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1729 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Vandana Thakur Opposite Party :- Shri Rahul Kumar, Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7

The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience of the order dated 11.11.2019 passed in Application U/s 482 No.40173 of 2019 (Smt. Vandana Thakur v. State of U.P. & Anr.)), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to direct the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Bulandshahr in Misc. Case No. 63 of 2019 (Smt. Vandana Thakur Vs. Pradeep), under Section 31 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 to ensure compliance of its order dated 11.7.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1748 of 2018 (Smt. Vandana Vs. Pradeep), under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005, P.S. Narsaina, District- Bulandshahr.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that pursuant to the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, the court below has passed an order dated 11.7.2019 by which the opposite party no. 2 was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- per month on 10th of every month, however the amount is not being paid and as such application was filed by the applicant for ensuring the compliance of the order dated 11.7.2019. However the said application is still pending disposal, although almost more than two months have lapsed.

¶11

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the court below is expected to make all endeavours to pass appropriate orders on the aforesaid application expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date of filing of certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties without giving any unnecessary adjournments to either parties and there is no other legal impediment.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of."

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite parties but the opposite parties have wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, have committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

¶14

Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite parties to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within three months from the

¶15

date of production of a copy of this order.

¶16

The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite parties and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within two weeks from today. The office shall send a copy of this order along with the selfaddressed stamped envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite parties within one week, thereafter and keep a record thereof. The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ Court and intimate the applicant of the order through the self-addressed envelop within a week, thereafter.

¶17

With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite parties within the stipulated time as aforementioned.

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioners alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶19

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶20

Order Date :- 13.7.2020 SP/

Smt. Vandana Thakur v. Shri Rahul Kumar, Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vandana Thakur v. Shri Rahul Kumar, Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate

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

Gaurav Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Chandra Bhartiya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Km. Renu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Committee of Management Sriram Janki Sanskrit Uttar Madhyama Vidyalay and Another Vs Pramod Kumar, Deputy Director Education (Sanskrit) Directorate and Another

Jitendra Kumar Vs Ashwani Kumar Awasthi, Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of U.P. and Another

Rishipal Singh Vs Parthsarthi Sen Sharma, the Commissioner, Gram Vikas