H.N.Seth, J. - (1.) THESE proceedings for punishing Sri Ram Das Tyagi, Advocate, for committing contempt of Court of the District Judge, Ghaziabad have been initiated on the basis of a report made by the District Judge.
(2.) THE report submitted by the District Judge and the papers accompanying the same show that on 10th March, 1980 after the District Judge had delivered judgment in S. T. No. 137 of 1977, Sri Ram Das Tyagi presented an application for releasing accused Lala Ram on bail THE District Judge directed that notice of the said application should be given to the District Government Counsel and thereafter he retired to his chambers. Reader of the Court, Sri Raghuraj Singh Tyagi, then asked Sri Ram Das Tyagi to supply a copy of the bail application, so that the same may, as directed by the District Judge, be delivered to the District Government Counsel. While furnishing the said copy to the Reader, Sri Ram Das Tyagi threw a paper-weight, kept on (he table of the Court, at the picture of Mahatma Gandhi which was hanging on the wall facing the dias and the glass fixed in the picture-frame was smashed. At the same time Sri Ram Das Tyagi uttered the following words :- "Nyayalaya Se Fauran Nyaya Prapt Nahin Hota Hai." (Immediate justice is not received from the court) THE Reader of the Court then reported the matter to the District Judge mentioning the names of the court officials in whose presence Sri Ram Das Tyagi had acted in the aforesaid manner. THE District Judge asked the witnesses mentioned in Reader's report to file affidavits, whereupon four employees of the court including the reader filed their respective affidavits describing the incident in the manner mentioned above. THE District Judge then made a reference to this Court for taking contempt of court proceedings against Sri Ram Das Tyagi, Advocate. This Court took cognizance of the contempt said to ha.ve been committed by Sri Ram Das Tyagi and on 25th of August, 1980 directed that requisite notice be issued to him. After notice was served upon Sri Tyagi he instead of appearing before this Court sent an application in the month of October, 1980 expressing his inability to personally appear before the Court and giving out his own version of the incident. He also claimed that His case may be heard only by Hindu Judges and urged that no non-Hindu or a Muslim Judge should try the same. The case set up by Sri Tyagi in paragraph of the application was that even though what had been reported by the Reader of the Court was correct, he had not given a complete version of the incident.According to him the Reader had merely mentioned that the applicant had broken the picture of Mahatma Gandhi and had uttered that immediate justice was nod available from the Court.In fact the applicant had, over and above that also said that Mahatma Gandhi was not fit to be called Father of the Nation and that he was merely a stooge in the hands of foreign company.In his application Sri Tyagi also made certain averments lauding Sri Subhash Chandra Bose and asserted that he did not commit any offence. According to him call of the time was that law should be practised only when statues of Gandhi are removed from all law courts in the Country and in its place statues of Subhash are put up and that till this is done he would go on breaking such statues. Sri Tyagi concluded his application by saying that he never intended to insult sacred law courts and that if any insult was involved, he may be excused. In the end he again stated that any decision by a non-Hindu or a Muslim Judge would not be acceptable to him. Sri Tyagi addressed another communication to this Court on 24th of September, 1982 saying that the case should be transferred to Ghaziabad for trial.
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY the presence of Sri Tyagi was secured and he engaged Sri V. C. Misra, Advocate to represent him. He filed a counter affidavit on 8th of December, 1982 owning therein that as reported by the reader of the District Judge he did say that immediate justice was not being received from the court, but he neither accepted nor questioned the correctness of the report made by the reader concerning his conduct in throwing a paper-weight at the picture of Mahatma Gandhi. In the affidavit Sri Tyagi criticised the District Judge by saying that he was in the habit of sitting in court at 11 a. m. and retiring at 3 p. m., thereby causing great inconvenience to the members of the Bar. According to him the action of the District Judge was detrimental to the interest of the litigants and that during his tenure it became impossible to get any application decided early and bail applications never used to be disposed of the same day. He claimed that he (Sri Tyagi) was accustomed to leading disciplined life and that he has been active member of Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh and belonged to Bhartiya Janta Party and that his innerself revolts as and when he finds something detrimental being done to the interest of people. He took pains to justify his remark regarding non- receipt of prompt justice from the court in the context that justice delayed was justice denied. In paragraph 12 of the affidavit he mentioned thus :- "That no doubt the deponent did utter the alleged words, but it was in good faith, in high spirit and without any intention to scandalise the Court, but was a fair criticism of the prevailing policy of the then District Judge and the deponent is advised that the same does not constitute contempt of Court." In paragraph 14 of the affidavit he stared that he had great regard for judiciary and it is for this reason that it was not acceptable to him that any body whether belonging to Executive or Legislative or public or even the Judiciary should act or behave in a manner which may result into losing faith of people in judiciary or that judiciary may be scandalised and this was the intention behind uttering the alleged words by him. He concluded the affidavit by saying that in case the court comes to the conclusion that in any manner whatsoever inadvertently any contempt has been committed by him he tendered unqualified apology. When the case was taken up for' hearing on 18th January, 1983 Sri V. C. Misra, learned counsel appearing for' Sri Tyagi sought for an adjournment of the case so as to enable him to file a supplementary counter affidavit. Sri Tyagi filed a supplementary counter affidavit before us on 20th of January, 1983. In this affidavit he asserted that inadvertently he bad failed to reply to the allegations in the report of Syed Mohd. Mehdi (official of this Court) dated 5th of April, 1982 under an impression that the words used by him viz. immediate justice is not received from the court only constituted the contempt when in fact the report contained one more allegation to the following effect:- "Instanteneously threw a paper-weight kept at the table of the Court at the picture of Mahatma Gandhi on the wall facing the dias and set in the glass-frame breaking its glass " and went on to deny the fact that he ever threw a paper-weight at the picture of Mahatma Gandhi as alleged. He asserted that the said allegations had been made falsely with a view to make out a case of contempt of court against him. He suggested that the picture might have been broken due to some fault of the staff of the District Judge and it was with a view to save their skin that the staff had made the allegations against him. In paragraph 4 of the affidavit Sri Tyagi again asserted that he never intended to either insult or scandalise the Court in any manner whatsoever. No doubt he wanted to maintain the dignity and honour of the Court and the faith of the people and, therefore, he wanted early justice for the people. He re-asserted that be had great regard for judiciary and he is young Advocate practising since 1977 and that in case the Court comes to the conclusion that in any manner whatsoever he inadvertently committed any contempt he expressed his regrets and tendered an unqualified apology.;