- (1.) The appellant is a politician and social worker. In a Seminar organised by the Indian Medical Association on the question of the desirability of the application of the Consumer Protection Act to doctors, the appellant made a speech on 11.12.1993 at Calcutta. The newspapers of 12.12.1993 carried the news about the speech said to have been made in the said Seminar by the appellant. Different newspapers carried different versions. Bengali news daily Bartaman published a report of the said speech of the appellant which when translated in English, as quoted in the judgment under appeal, reads as under: "The judges do not mete out justice. They deliver the judgments at the court with an eye towards their self-interests. The briefcases full with currency notes find their ways in the judges' house, in exchange, many recorded criminals, murderers and forgers go scot-free. Biman Babu, the CPM leader made the comment about judges. Biman Babu declares that he was making those comments consciously. He would not flinch back if he were made to stand on the dock for this."
(2.) In case the appellant made the statement as quoted above it was definitely a matter that could not be ignored and deserved an action to be taken. Therefore, the aforesaid publication resulted in initiation of suo motu contempt proceedings against the appellant and two others, namely, the Editor and publisher of the newspaper. The contempt case was heard by a Full Bench of three Judges of the High Court. By the impugned judgment, the apologies of the Editor and publisher were accepted. The appellant was held guilty of contempt and a fine of Rs. 1000.00 was imposed on him.
(3.) The appellant in this appeal has challenged the impugned judgment of the High Court. This Court has also issued to the appellant a notice to show cause why the punishment should not be enhanced in case the conviction is upheld.;