This is an order in a contempt petition challenging an alleged violation of a status quo direction. The Court, relying on a police report finding no construction going on, held the act not contemptuous and closed the petition.
Contempt petition closed; no penalty imposed.
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.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010083002023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/212/2023
KAMINI DEVI @ KAMINI
W/O- PUNIT SINGH, R/O- LAHORIJAN, NEAR IB BUNGLOW, P.O. AND P.S. KHATKHATI, PIN- 782480, DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM
VERSUS
BHESH BAHADUR PURI
S/O- LATE CHABI LAL PURI, R/O- LAHORIJAN, NEAR IB BUNGLOW, P.O. AND P.S. KHATKHATI, PIN- 782480, DIST.- KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR D KAMEI
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. T R GOGOI
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
04.08.2023
Heard Shri AR Rongmei, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. BM Chetri, learned counsel for the sole respondent. Shri TR Gogoi, learned State Counsel has also assisted the Court.
The present petition has been instituted alleging violation of order dated 10.03.2023 passed by this Court in IA(C)/621/2023 arising out of RSA/32/2023.
Page No.# 2/3
Shri Rongmei, learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing the attention of this Court to the aforesaid order dated 10.03.2023 has submitted that a direction was passed for maintaining status quo over the plot of land which was the subject matter of the litigation.
It is the case of the petitioner that the order of status quo has been violated and the old house was removed and there was construction of pucca RCC pillar on 14.03.2023. It has further been submitted that the Khatkhati Police Station was approached whereafter also the construction was going on.
Ms. Chetri, learned counsel for the sole respondent has submitted that the allegation of violation is absolutely incorrect and she has also referred to the affidavitin-opposition filed on 29.05.2023 where the respondent had categorically denied the allegation of any violation.
This Court while issuing notice, vide order dated 21.04.2023 had directed that for the interest of justice, a report be called from the Officer-in-Charge, Khatkhati Police Station regarding the allegation of violation. In this connection, Shri Gogoi, learned State Counsel has submitted that in compliance with the said direction, a report has been furnished which was already reflected in the Court’s order dated 20.06.2023.
After hearing the parties, this Court had noted that in the order dated 20.07.2023, this Court, after perusal of the report dated 20.06.2023 of the concerned Officer of the Khatkhati Police Station had come to a prima facie finding that the allegations of contempt may not be substantiated. However, in the interest of justice, a copy of the report was directed to be furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner to seek instructions.
Shri Ronmei, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the violation has been done even prior to making of the verification exercise.
The submissions made on behalf of the petitioner is, essentially a matter of fact. There is no challenge or dispute with the correctness of the report dated 20.06.2023
Page No.# 3/3
and the said report has been furnished pursuant to an order of this Court dated 21.04.2023. The said report categorically states that on the visit, no construction was found to be going on the disputed land. It is also stated in the said report that the parties were directed to maintain peace and not to create any law and order situation.
This Court exercising powers of contempt is required to act with due care and caution as the consequence of contempt is penal in nature. In the instant case, no such act is found to be contemptuous in view of the report dated 20.06.2023.
In that view of the matter, the contempt petition is closed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order maintaining status quo on disputed land was violated.
KAMINI DEVI @ KAMINI
BHESH BAHADUR PURI
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
