Dismissed

Deepak Shevantilal Jhaveri v. M/S. Alpha Exports and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Jan 2011CONP/4/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the grievance regarding issance of notices despite this Court's stay order did not merit contempt action as the petitioner was pursuing remedies and no prejudice was caused, especially with a subsequent Supreme Court stay.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the lower Court on merits.

Deepak Shevantilal Jhaveri Vs M/S. Alpha Exports and Ors. — Contempt of Court | Bombay HC (2011)

PPD

9.CONP4-10

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.4 OF 2010

¶6

Mr.Deepak Shevantilal Jhaveri. Vs.

¶7

M/s. Alpha Exports & Ors.

¶8

..Petitioner.

¶9

..Respondents.

¶10

Mr.C.J. Doveson, Advocate i/b. Mr.Yadav P.r., Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.P.A. Pol, Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

None for the Respondents/contemners.

¶12

CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ.

¶13

DATED : 12^TH JANUARY, 2011.

¶14

P.C.

¶15

Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner. The grievance in this Petition is that inspite of the order dated 23.3.2009, in particular para-7 thereof, which clearly mentions that the operation of the said order would remain stayed for a period of four weeks, the Respondents made application before the trial Court for issuance of warrant/notice against the Petitioner and other accused on 30.3.2009. On the basis of the said application, notice was issued to the Petitioner by the trial Court. It is argued that the effect of the order passed by this Court on 23.3.2009 was obviously not to precipitate the matter against the Petitioner.

¶16

In our opinion, the grievance in the Petition does not merit initiation of contempt action against the Respondents, more so because

¶17

¶18

9.CONP4-10

¶19

the Petitioner has been pursuing his remedy before the trial Court and it cannot be said that any prejudice has been caused to the Petitioner as such. It is also noticed that later on the Supreme Court by order dated 9.7.2009 has stayed the further proceedings before the trial Court, while entertaining SLP (Cri.) No.4182/2009 against the order dated 23.3.2009 passed by this Court.

¶20

Suffice it to observe that this is not a fit case for initiating contempt action. The Petition is, therefore, disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to pursue his remedy before the lower Court on merits.

¶21

(A. R. JOSHI, J.)

¶22

(A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)

Deepak Shevantilal Jhaveri v. M/S. Alpha Exports and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Shevantilal Jhaveri v. M/S. Alpha Exports and Ors.

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

Lalit Somdatta Nagpal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anil Somdatta Nagpal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sitaram Sakhtu Chaurasia Vs Sharad Dalvi and Anr.

Gauri S. Nabar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Tukaram Baburao Shinde and Anr. Vs Gruh Finance Limited and Anr.

Ajeet Shankarlal Bhatia Vs Dilip Mohandas Ramrakhyni and Ors.