In a contempt application for willful disobedience of an order removing obstructions from public property, the court held that mere obstruction does not automatically constitute contempt and the applicant has a remedy approaching the Magistrate. The contempt application was dismissed.
The contempt application was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:190672
Court No. - 1
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 7538 of 2024
Applicant :- Ram Vishal Opposite Party :- Sri Dhanpal Jaiswal S.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhan Gupta
Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
The present application has been filed pleading willful disobedience of the order dated 11.02.2019 passed by this Court in Writ - C No. 3094 of 2019.
The claim of the applicant is that even though the obstructions were removed by the concerned Magistrate as acknowledged by this Court in its order dated 11.02.2019 passed in Writ - C No. 3094 of 2019, the opposite party no. 3 has again started encroaching over the public property.
The fact itself does not make the opposite parties liable for contempt and the applicant has the remedy to approach the concerned Magistrate for suitable remedial action.
In view of the aforesaid, no contempt is made out.
The contempt application is dismissed .
Order Date :- 5.12.2024 Vipasha
Digitally signed by :- VIPASHA MUKHERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the opposite party's continued encroachment constitutes willful disobedience warranting contempt.
Whether the applicant possesses any other adequate remedy.
Ram Vishal
Salil Kumar Rai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
