BIJAY KUMAR MAHANTY Vs. JADU RAM CHANDRA SAHOO
LAWS(SC)-2002-12-44
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on December 13,2002

BIJAY KUMAR MAHANTY Appellant
VERSUS
JACHJ RAM CHANDRA SAHOO Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

KALPANA AGARWAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-9-151] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA KUMAR AGARWAL VS. V K JAIN [LAWS(ALL)-2008-4-30] [REFERRED TO]
B SUGUNA DEVI VS. C B S VENKATA RAMANA [LAWS(APH)-2008-9-82] [REFERRED TO]
RAGHUNATHRAO PATIL BIDAR VS. DEPUTY COMMISSION BIDAR [LAWS(KAR)-2009-12-81] [REFERRED TO]
SUO MOTU VS. E N SAKORE P S I VAIRAG POLICE STATION [LAWS(BOM)-2006-7-239] [REFERRED TO]
SUO MOTU CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2008-8-287] [REFERRED TO]
B KRISHNA REDDY VS. PUSHPA SUBRAHMANYAM [LAWS(APH)-2011-4-73] [REFERRED TO]
BIMAN BOSE VS. STATE OF W.B. [LAWS(SC)-2003-2-131] [REFERRED TO]
K. MALLAIAH AND ORS. VS. SANDEEP KUMAR SULTANIA AND ORS. [LAWS(APH)-2015-7-10] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Y. K. Sabharwal, J. - (1.)Police Officers are supposed to be the members of a disciplined force. It is of utmost importance to curb any tendency in them to flout orders of the Court. It is more so when flouting of order results in deprivation of personal liberty of an individual. If protectors of law, to take revenge, defy court orders they will have to be sternly dealt with and appropriate punishment inflicted also with a view to send a message across the board that such an act cannot be countenanced.
(2.)The appellant is a police officer. At the relevant time, i.e., on 13th November, 1990, he was the officer-in-charge of the police station in question. A police officer of that police station had reported that respondent had assaulted him on 30th September, 1990 which was the immersion day of Goddess Durga while he was on duty and the respondent had been asked by him to give side to other image (Medha) to pass. A case was registered against the respondent.
(3.)Now, the admitted facts. In connection with the aforesaid case, the respondent was arrested by the appellant on 13th November, 1990 from his residence at 7.30 a.m. He was kept in Police Custody and was produced before the Magistrate on 14th November. The respondent in respect of this very case had been granted bail by the Sessions Judge on 6th November, 1990. The respondent had obtained certified copy of the order of bail on 7th November. The respondent was produced before the Magistrate on 14th November when his advocate produced a certified copy of the order of the Sessions Judge and, thus, he was released by the Magistrate.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.