B.S. Chauhan, J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, (hereinafter called the Rs. Act 1971) arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 5.5.2006 passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Contempt of Court Case No. 13 of 1999.
(2.) FACTS: A) Appellant is an advocate practising for last 30 years in the District Court, Etawah (U.P.). On 25.7.1998, he produced one Om Prakash for the purpose of surrender, impersonating him as Ram Kishan S/o Ashrafi Lal who was wanted in a criminal case in the court of IInd ACJM, Etawah. There was some controversy regarding the genuineness of the person who came to surrender and therefore, the Presiding Officer of the Court raised certain issues. So, the Appellant misbehaved with the said officer in the court and used abusive language. B) The Presiding Officer of the court vide letter dated 28.9.1998 made a complaint against the Appellant to the U.P. Bar Council and vide letter dated 27.10.1998 made a reference to the High Court for initiating contempt proceedings under Section 15 of the Act, 1971 against him. The High Court considered the matter and issued show cause notice on 5.5.1999 to the Appellant. In response to the said notice, the Appellant submitted his reply dated 24.5.1999, denying the allegations made against him, but, tendering an apology in the form of an affidavit stating that he was keeping the court in the highest esteem. C) The Bar Council of U.P. dismissed the complaint referred by the Presiding Officer vide order dated 18.3.2001, but the Allahabad High Court did not consider it proper to accept the explanation submitted by the Appellant or accept the apology tendered by him, rather, it framed the charges against the Appellant on 27.9.2004. In response to the same, the Appellant again submitted an affidavit dated 18.10.2005 tendering an apology similar to one in the affidavit filed earlier. D) The Division Bench of Allahabad High Court considered the matter on judicial side, giving full opportunity to the Appellant to defend himself. The High Court ultimately held the Appellant guilty of committing the contempt and sentenced him to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. Hence this appeal.
(3.) This Court vide order dated 26.6.2006 suspended the operation of sentence and directed the Appellant to deposit the fine of Rs. 2,000/-in this Court, which seems to have been deposited.;