Dismissed

Satya Narayan Gupta S/O Late Shri Gajanand Gupta v. Shri M.S. Yadav

Rajasthan HC5 Aug 2019SAC/12/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a special appeal challenging the Single Judge's order dismissing a contempt petition. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Court held that the impugned order was not a decision to punish and the appeal was not maintainable under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable; Application No. 1/2019 was also dismissed.

Satya Narayan Gupta S/O Late Shri Gajanand Gupta Vs Shri… — Contempt of Court | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

D. B. Special Appeal (Civil) No. 12/2019

¶3

¶4

S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 2188/2018

¶5

Satya Narayan Gupta S/o Late Shri Gajanand Gupta, aged about 55 Years, By Caste Mahajan, R/o E-9/569, Chitrakoot, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) working Account Officer in BSNL o/o the PGMTD Jaipur

¶6

----Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shri M.S. Yadav, General Manager (Vigilance), BSNL, Rajasthan Telecom Circle, Jhalana Doongari, Jaipur.

¶9

----Contemnor-Respondent

¶10

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Satya Narayan Gupta, appellant in person.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

¶12

Judgment

¶13

05/08/2019

¶14

This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging judgment dated 29.03.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby contempt petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed by the learned Single judge as in his considered opinion, no contempt of order of this Court was made out.

¶15

Office has raised an objection about maintainability of the appeal.

¶16

The appellant, who appears in person, has filed Application No. 1/2019 to overrule the objection raised by the Office.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[SAC-12/2019]

¶19

Apparently, the learned Single Judge was not persuaded to agree with the submission of the appellant that the respondent committed contempt of the Court. The Supreme Court in Mindapore Peoples’ Co-op. Bank Ltd. & Others Vs. Chunilal Nanda & Others, AIR 2006 SC 2190 held that an appeal under Section 19 is maintainable only against an order or decision of the High Court passed in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt, that is, an order imposing punishment for contempt. Neither an order declining to initiate proceedings for contempt, nor an order initiating proceedings for contempt, nor an order dropping the proceedings for contempt, nor an order acquitting or exonerating the contemnor is appelable under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

¶20

In view of above dictum of the Supreme Court, present appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶21

Application No. 1/2019 also stands dismissed.

¶22

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J

¶23

MANOJ NARWANI /1

Satya Narayan Gupta S/O Late Shri Gajanand Gupta v. Shri M.S. Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Narayan Gupta S/O Late Shri Gajanand Gupta v. Shri M.S. Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Vs M/S Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax , Vs M/S Kusum Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.

Anil Kumar Yadav S/O Shri Lalaram Yadav Vs State of Rajasthan

Mool Chand Kumawat S/O Late Nanulal Vs Sanjeev Ranjan

Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Vs Sher Singh Meena S/O Shri Ram Swaroop Lal Meena

M/S Pathak Drug and Pharmaceuticals Vs Union of India