The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed a Contempt Petition which was filed belatedly. The Court held that under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, proceedings could not be initiated at this stage, given the petitioners failed to effect service of the contempt notice on the respondent.
Contempt Petition closed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
ON THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021
BEFORE:
HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
CONTEMPT PETITION No. 576 of 2018
BETWEEN:
Harish Chandra Sharma & others. ...Petitioners (By Mr. Saurabh Pandey, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Sumit Bajaj, Advocate)
AND:
R.K. Kunwar. ...Respondent
(There is no representation for the respondent)
JUDGMENT
This Contempt Petition was filed on 24.08.2018. Though, contempt notice was issued to the respondent; but, petitioners did not take steps for effecting service upon the respondent.
2. In view of provision contained in Section 20 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, proceedings for contempt cannot be initiated at this belated stage.
3. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is
closed.
(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.)
Arpan
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Harish Chandra Sharma & others
R.K. Kunwar
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
