R.M. Lodha, C.J.I. - (1.)AS a result of the incidents at Ayodhya on 06.12.1992, the President of India issued a Proclamation Under Article 356 of the Constitution of India assuming to himself all the functions of the Government of Uttar Pradesh, dissolving the U.P. Vidhan Sabha. Initially, the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Ordinance, 1993 (No. 8 of 1993) was promulgated. The said Ordinance was later on replaced by Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993 (No. 33 of 1993) (for short, 'the 1993 Act'). On the same day, i.e. on 07.01.1993, when Act No. 33 of 1993 was enacted, Special Reference (being Special Reference No. 1 of 1993) was made to this Court by the President of India Under Article 143(1) of the Constitution of India. The constitutional validity of the 1993 Act and the maintainability of the Special Reference No. 1 of 1993 were being examined by the Constitution Bench of this Court. It is alleged that the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), which was banned at that time, held Dharam Sansad in the first week of April, 1994 and after the Dharam Sansad was over, its President, Vishnu Hari Dalmia and Joint General Secretary, Giriraj Kishore made certain derogatory statements concerning this Court in the news conference. The statements to the media made by Vishnu Hari Dalmia and Giriraj Kishore were published in Indian Express in its edition of 10.04.1994. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, designated Senior Advocate filed Contempt Petition (Crl.) before this Court against Vishnu Hari Dalmia and Giriraj Kishore, President and Joint General Secretary of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Indian Express by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court Under Article 129 of the Constitution of India. It is averred that the statements made by Vishnu Hari Dalmia and Giriraj Kishore and published in Indian Express were malicious and tantamount to scandalizing this Court and lowering its authority. In the contempt petition, the Petitioner had drawn the attention to the following extracts from Indian Express news report:
VHP warns SC not to 'exceed limits'

Addressing to media persons here on Saturday Vishnu Hari Dalmia and Giriraj Kishore VHP President and joint general Secretary respectively assailed the apex Court for attempting to "arrogate the power of the executive.

The Ayodhya issue had so far eluded a solution only because of the delay in pronouncing the judgment. "Justice delayed is justice denied".

The judiciary has no jurisdiction over the Ram Janam Bhoomi "Kishore cautioned the court not to overstep its limits.

He (Kishore) remarked that the Supreme Court had lost its prestige because of the delay in adjudicating the Ayodhya dispute.

The above report in Indian Express is attributed to Express News Service.

(2.)IT is also averred that Giriraj Kishore also gave a statement in Khabardar India (11 -17 April, 1994) that the Government influences the Court and quotes an anonymous Minister to have said, he has the Court in one pocket and leaders in another. The contempt petition also states that the news item in the Indian Express constitutes a gross criminal contempt for which the authors of the statement, namely, Vishnu Hari Dalmia and Giriraj Kishore, the Editor and Publisher of the Indian Express, the persons in -charge of the Express News Service and the reporters, are answerable to this Court.
On 12.04.1994, upon motion by Dr. Rajeev Dhawan before the Constitution Bench presided over by the Chief Justice, the Contempt Petition was taken on board. The Constitution Bench, on that day, passed the following order:

This application is moved by Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, a learned advocate drawing attention of the Court to certain statements attributed to Sri Giriraj Kishore published in the newspaper Indian Express of 10th April, 1994 and in the Periodical styled "Khabardar India" of 11 -17 April, 1994, which, it is contended, tend to lower the image of the Court in the mind of the public and constitute an affront to the dignity and authority of this Court.

The utterances of Sri Giriraj Kishore, if true, might amount to criminal contempt.

In the first instance we direct issue of notice to Sri Giriraj Kishore and to the Editor, Printer, Publisher as well as the Reporter of the particular news item of the said issue of Indian Express.

For the present we defer initiation of proceedings against Sri Vishnu Hari Dalmia against whom also the Petitioner seeks action. That will be considered after the returns are filed by Sri Giriraj Kishore and the Editor, Printer, Publisher and reporter of the Newspaper.

So far as the second publication, viz. "Khabardar India" referred to in Annexure -II to the petition is concerned, Dr. Dhawan has not been able to furnish the names or addresses of the Editor, Printer, Publisher and the reporter of the publication, as, according to the submission, these particulars are not discernable from the publication. Dr. Dhawan shall furnish these particulars after which notices will go to them.

However, in regard to the statement in Annexure -II attributed to Sri Giriraj Kishore, he will file his return. After the returns are filed the question whether the Court will initiate suo motu contempt proceedings shall be considered. Notices are returnable by 26th April, 1994.

(3.)ON 13.04.1994, the Petitioner Dr. Rajeev Dhawan filed a memo setting out the names and addresses of the editor, printer and publisher of the periodical "Khabardar India". The cause title of the contempt petition was amended and the following were impleaded as contemners: (1) Gulshan Kumar Mahajan, Owner, Publisher, Printer and Editor of Khabardar India, (2) Pradeep Thakur, Reporter, Khabardar India, (3) Giriraj Kishore, (4) Prabhu Chawla, Editor, Indian Express (5) V.K. Kapur, Printer and Publisher, Indian Express and (6) Bhaskar Roy, Reporter, Express News Service.