STATE Vs. BRAHMA PRAKASH
LAWS(ALL)-1950-5-36
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on May 05,1950

STATE Appellant
VERSUS
BRAHMA PRAKASH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Mootham, J. - (1.) In this ease notice has been issued to three office-bearer and five members of the executive committee of the District Bar Association, Muzaffarnagar, to show cause why they should not be dealt with for contempt of Court.
(2.) On 20th April 1949, the executive committee held a meeting at which several resolutions were passed- The opening paragraphs of the first resolution were in these words : "Resolved that : Whereas the members of the Association have had ample opportunity of forming an opinion of the judicial work of Shri Kanhaiya Lal, Judicial Magistrate, and Shri Lalta Prasad, Revenue Officer.' It is now their considered opinion that the officers are thoroughly incompetent in law, do not inspire 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 alike." Then followed a number of allegations which were described as "other defects" which were in addition to the defects common to both of them" referred to in that part of the resolution which has been quoted. On the following day a copy of the resolutions was forwarded by the President of the Bar Association to the District Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar, together with a covering letter in which the President said : "The complaints against them" (That is against the said Shri Kanhaiya Lal, Judicial Magistrate, and Shri Lalta Prasad, Revenue Officer) "as catalogued would suggest that they are incapable of improvement and thus instead of proving an acquisition to the bench, as these new cadres are expected to be, they are already discrediting it by deliberately perverting facts whenever it suits them." A copy of the resolution was at the same time sent to the Commissioner of the Division, to the Chief Secretary of the United Provinces Government and to the Premier of the United Provinces. It is in respect of that part of the resolution of 20th April and of the President's letter of the following day which we have quoted that these proceedings have been instituted.
(3.) The opposite parties have entered an appearance and each of them has filed an affidavit. In the case of two of them, Shri Sharvan Deo and Shri Sheo Shanker Lal, it now appears that they were not members of the executive committee of the Bar Association on 20th April 1949, and did not associate them, selves with the above mentioned resolutions. In the circumstances we are of opinion that there is no case for them to answer, and the notice to them must be discharged.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.