Y. K. Sabharwal, J. - (1.) By the impugned judgment and order dated 31st March, 1993, the High Court has come to the conclusion that the appellant Radha Mohan Lal (Criminal Appeal No. 445/93) and his advocate, appellant Sualal Yadav (Criminal Appeal No. 449/93) have committed the contempt of Court. Both have been sentenced to three months simple imprisonment each besides fine of Rs. 1,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days.
(2.) The basis for initiation and punishment for contempt of Court is the averment made in para 4 of the application dated 18th September, 1991 that had been filed before a learned single Judge of the High Court in a civil revision petition which was listed before the learned Judge. The said para 4 reads as under : "That apart from it, the undersigned has been informed by his client-Shri Radha Mohan Lal Vakil Ex. Chairman of the Municipal Council, Jaipur, that he along with other non-petitioners have moved a complaint in writing against Honble Shri R. S. Kejriwal to the Honble Chief Justice requesting him to list the above revision before a Bench of which Honble Shri R. S. Kejriwal is not a member as they have reasonable grounds to believe that no impartial justice would be imparted from this Bench. In the light of the above exceptional and extraordinary facts and circumstances of the matter, the above revision may kindly be allowed to be listed before a Bench not constituted of the Honble Mr. Justice Kejriwal as the non-petitioners are known to have lost faith in this Bench for reason obvious. In case the above revision is not allowed to be listed before another Bench the applicant may be allowed sufficient time to approach the Supreme Court for transfer of this case."
(3.) The revision petition arose out of an interim order passed in a civil suit that had been filed by appellant Radha Mohan Lal and four others in representative capacity allegedly to ensure that access to the temple which was the subject-matter of the suit is not obstructed as a consequence of encroachments by the Rajasthan Sports Council. The interim order granted in their favour had been assailed in the revision petition. It is claimed that some observations made by the learned Judge on 13th September, 1991 in course of hearing of arguments led to about 50 senior citizens representing to the Chief Justice that the petition be heard by some other Judge. On 18th September, 1991, when the matter came up for hearing before the learned single Judge, the fact of representation having been made to the Chief Justice was given out and this led to the filing of the application dated 18th September, 1991. Ultimately, the averments made in the application led to initiation of proceedings for contempt of Court and the finding of contempt and punishment on the appellants as aforestate. Appellant Sualal Yadav was the advocate for Radha Mohan Lal both in the revision petition as also in the contempt petition.;