B. K. Mukherjea, J. - (1.) This appeal which has come before us, on special leave, is directed against a judgment of a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court, dated May 5, 1950, by which the learned Judges held the appellants guilty of contempt of court; and although the apology tendered by the appellants was accepted, they were directed to pay the costs of the Respondent State.
(2.) The appellants, six in number, are members of the Executive Committee of the District Bar Association at Muzaffarnagar within the State of Uttar Pradesh, and the contempt proceedings were started against them, because of certain resolutions passed by the Committee on the 20th April, 1949, copies of which were forwarded to the District Magistrate and other officers by a covering letter signed by Appellant No. 1 as President of the Bar Association.
(3.) To appreciate the contention that have been raised in this appeal, it would be necessary to state a few relevant facts. The resolution which forms the basis of the contempt proceedings relate to the conduct of two judicial officers, both of whom functioned at Muzaffarnagar at the relevant time. One of them named Kanhaya Lal Mehra was a Judicial Magistrate while the other, named Lalta Prasad was Revenue Officer. It is said that the 1st appellant as President of the Bar Association received numerous complaints regarding the way in which these officers disposed of cases in their Courts and behaved towards the lawyers and the litigant public. The Executive Committee of the Association took the matter in hand and, after satisfying themselves that the complaints were legitimate and well-founded, they held a meeting on 20th April 1949 in which the following resolutions were passed. RESOLVED THAT - "Whereas the members of the Association have had ample opportunity of forming an opinion of judicial work of Sri Kanhaya Lal, Judicial Magistrate and Shri Lalta Prasad, Revenue Officer. It is now their considered opinion that the two officers are thoroughly incompetent in law, do not inspite confidence in their judicial work, are given to stating wrong facts when passing orders and are overbearing and discourteous to the litigant public and the lawyers. Besides the above-mentioned defects common to both of them, other defects are separately catalogued hereunder:- * * * * (The complaints against each of the officers seperately were then set out under specific Heads). Resolved further that copies of the resolution be sent to the Hon'ble Premier, the Chief Secretary of the Uttar Pradesh Government, the Commissioner and the District Magistrate for suitable action. Resolved that the District Magistrate and the Collector be requested to meet a deputation of the following in this connection at an early date." (The names of 5 members who were to form the deputation, were then mentioned.) ;