S.P.Srivastava, K.N.Ojha, JJ. - (1.) The present proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act were initiated against S/Shri Suresh Singh Yadav. Vishwa Nath Shagh Yadav. Avani Ranjan Misra alias Kukku Babu, Jagdish Singh Shakya, Maharaj Singh Yadav, Rajish Rajiv Yadav, Suresh Chandra Yadav son of Shri Pahunchi Lal, Mahendra Kumar Bhardwaj, Sanjit Gaur. Ashok Bajpai, Raja Ram Yadav, Ram Sewak, Manik Chandra Sangrami. Ram Baran Shakya. Ram Awatar Shashi and Saghir Ahmad Advocates practising in the Civil Court. Mainpuri in view of the complaint! report of the District Judge. Mainpuri dated 12/5/2003.
(2.) In the said complaint/report it had been indicated that at about 7.30 A.M. all the above named disgruntled Advocates entered into his court room hurling abuses and slogans against him and Shri B.P. Mathur. Special Judge. Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the Courts and created not only instanced but also created a terror and fear in the mind of the litigants. These Advocates continuously shouted slogans which have been quoted in the complaint. 11 was also indicated that the Advocates were haring language not only against the District Judge but also against the whole judicial system which could not even be mentioned in writing. These Advocates attempted to scandalize by hurling abuses and slogans which would shake the confidence of the litigants public in the system. It was further asserted that these Advocates not only created terror have and nuisance inside and outside the Court but also gave threats and adopted abrasive behaviour use of disrespectful language. They had thumped the doors and tables in the courtrooms and also hurled the chairs kept inside the courtroom in order to create a rein of terror. They also compelled the staff of the Court of the District Judge to leave the courtroom alongwith the case files under the rein of terror. They created a fear in the mind of the other Judicial Officers. The Advocates remained present inside the courtroom till 12.15 P.M. and stopped the District Judge from discharging any judicial work.
(3.) The District Judge has reported that the activities of the Advocates complained of was only with a view to create fear in the mind of Judicial Officers and put a pressure not only upon the District Judge but also upon all the Judicial Officers so that they may pass order and judgment in their favour in the cases in which they had been engaged as counsel.;