- (1.)A grave and serious incident happened on 04.03.2014 in the precincts of the Supreme Court. The incident has been reported in various newspapers published from New Delhi. We refer to the incident as 'Ink Throwing Incident'. It happened like this: Subrata Roy was being brought to the Supreme Court on Tuesday afternoon (04.03.2014) in pursuance of the order passed by this Court. Manoj Sharma, Advocate, hailing from Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh positioned himself close to where Subrata Roy was to enter so that he could throw ink on him and ink was, in fact, thrown on Subrata Roy. The compilation of News Reports has been handed over to us by Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, learned Attorney General. The compilation of News Reports is marked 'X'. Learned Attorney General has also prepared a brief summary of Newspaper Reports which we mark as 'Y' The incident, prima facie, discloses obstruction in the administration of justice by Manoj Sharma, Advocate.
(2.)Learned Attorney General submits that the act of Manoj Sharma, Advocate, is very serious and appropriate action needs to be taken against him Moreover, according to him, the relevant act did not necessarily have to be committed in the presence of the Court, but may be treated as constructively in the presence of the Court. The view of learned Attorney General is shared by Mr. Arvind v. Datar, learned senior counsel who is representing Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in the contempt proceedings in which Subrata Roy was summoned by this Court and is also by Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior counsel, who is appearing for some of the Directors of two Sahara companies in that matter.
(3.)In view of the above, we are satisfied, prima facie, that act of Manoj Sharma amounts to criminal contempt Under Section 2(c)(iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short, 'Act') and Article 129 of the Constitution of India. We, accordingly, take suo motu cognizance of the criminal contempt and direct that notice be issued to Manoj Sharma, Advocate, as to why he should not be punished for contempt of this Court Under Section 12 of the Act. Notice is made returnable on March 24, 2014.