The High Court disposed of a reference under the Contempt of Courts Act regarding fixed banners declaring a fast in front of the Court. The bench held that such protest did not scandalize the Court or interfere with justice and refused to entertain the reference as an offence was already registered.
The reference for criminal contempt is disposed of.
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.
(12)REF-3-2024.doc
rajshree
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL REFERENCE NO.3 OF 2024
A.K. Damate ] .. Applicant vs. R.E. Chavan & Ors. ] .. Respondents
Ms.M.M. Deshmukh, APP for the State.
CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ
DATE : 3rd SEPTEMBER, 2024.
P.C.
1] A reference from Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Khandala, under Section 15(2) of the Contempt Of Courts Act, 1971 refer to the alleged contemptuous act of the respondents, two of them being the Advocates practicing before the said Court.
It is alleged that the Contemnor Nos.1 to 5 fixed banners at different places in Khandala Village and in front of Court, depicting message of fasting between 10.09.2023 to 27.09.2023 and it is alleged that by circulating the pamphlets and by fixing the banners, they have committed criminal contempt of the Court.
1/2
(12)REF-3-2024.doc
2] It is pertinent to note that CR no.136/2023 is registered at the instance of JMFC in Khandala Police Station which has invoked Section 143, 500 and 506 of the IPC and Section 66(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 against the Contemners.
It is reported that the Contemners pressurized the Court and disturbed the working of the Court and by addressing confidential letters and circulating pamphlets, they have interfered in the administration of justice.
3] We have perused the reference order and we fail to understand as to how the alleged act amounted to interference in the administration of justice and how it has scandalized the Court.
The banners being placed outside the Court declaring that they are going on fast, in no way would amount to a contemptuous act, as the citizens have right to protest provided the protest do not lower the dignity of the Court.
In any case, now, at the instance of the Magistrate, an offence has already been registered and therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the reference.
In the wake of above, Reference is disposed off.
[MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J]
[BHARATI DANGRE, J]
2/2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether fixing banners outside the Court declaring a fast amounted to criminal contempt or interference in the administration of justice.
Whether the Court should entertain the reference when an offence has already been registered at the instance of the Magistrate against the contemners.
Whether citizens' right to protest extends to displaying banners in front of the Court without lowering its dignity.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
A.K. Damate
R.E. Chavan & Ors.
Bharati Dangre
Manjusha Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
