Sunil Ambwani, J. - (1.) We have heard Shri Mahipal Singh Rana the alleged contemnor, Advocate in defence to the reference of this Criminal Contempt Petition at length. His Counsel Shri R.N. Singh, Senior Advocate had earlier addressed the Court in support of preliminary objections to the interim order dated 28.10.2004, restraining him to enter the Court premises of judgeship at Etah. Shri Vijay Shanker Misra, learned G. A. and Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned A.G.A. has made submissions on behalf of State of U.P.
(2.) Shri Onkar Singh Yadav, the then Civil Judge (Senior Division) Etah, made a reference under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1972 (in short the Act) to this Court through District Judge, Etah on 7.6.2003 recording two separate incidents dated 16.4.2003 in his Court in which the contemnor Shri Mahipal Singh Rana, Advocate appeared before him and conducted himself in a manner which falls within the definition of criminal contempt as defined in Section 2(c) of the Act. These references were forwarded by the District Judge, Etah to the Registrar General of this Court vide his letter No. 105/P.A. Ist/2003 dated June 16, 2003 and were received by S.O. Admin. in the office of Registrar General of this Court on 19.6.2003. Under the standing orders of Hon'ble the then Chief Justice, to place such matters first before the Administrative Judge of the concerned judgeship, the matter was placed before the Administrative Judge, Etah on 7.7.2003. His Lordship vide order dated 18.6.2004 perused the records and directed the matter to be placed before Hon'ble Chief Justice. The Registrar General submitted report to Hon'ble Chief Justice on 7.7.2004, who passed an order on 11.7.2004 as follows; Refer to the bench having contempt determination
(3.) The matter came up before the Division Bench presided over by Hon'ble the then Acting Chief Justice and that on 28.10.2004, while issuing notices to the contemnor to show cause as to why he should not be punished for contempt of Court in connection with the incidents in the Court of Shri Onkar Singh Yadav, Civil Judge (Senior Division) Etah dated 16.6.2003 and on 13.5.2003, an interim order was passed restraining the contemnor from entering the district Court compound of Etah. The interim order dated 28.10.2004 is quoted as below; Issue notice to contemnor Mahipal Singh Rana, Advocate, Etah to show cause as to why he should not be punished for contempt of Court in connection with the incidents in the Court of Sri Onkar Singh Yadav, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Etah dated 16.4.2003 and 13.5.2003. In connection with the aforesaid incidents, Sri Onkar Sing Yadav, Civil Judge (Senior Division) had written a letter to the District Judge, Etah which reads as follows, ..(VERNACULAR MATTER OMMITED).. A persual of the letter addressed to the Registrar General shows that there are four cases under Section 302 IPC, five cases under Section 307 IPC and other cases under other provisions of IPC, pending against the contemnor. On the basis of aforesaid letters, the Administrative Judge, Etah was of the view that criminal contempt proceedings be initiated against the contemnor Mahipal Singh Rana, Advocate. The question about limitation has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pallav Seth v. Custodian AIR2001 SC 2763 , 2001 (49)BLJR1920 , [2001 ]107 CompCas76 (SC), (2001)4 CompLJ161 (SC), 2001 CriLJ4175 , JT2001 (6)SC 330 , 2001 (5 )SCALE127 , (2001)7 SCC549 , 2001 (2)UJ1464 (SC). We are prima facie of the view that the contemnor Mahipal Singh Rana, Advocate, Etah has committed gross contempt of Court and hence we are issuing notice against him to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt of Court. We further direct that until further orders of this Court, the contemnor Mahipal Singh Rana, Advocate will not be allowed to enter in the District Court compound of Etah. A similar direction was issued by this Court in Criminal Contempt No. 33 of 1999 between State of U.P. v. Sri Shashi Kumar Tvagi decided on 11.10.2004. Let a copy of this order be given to learned Counsel for the parties on payment of usual charges by tomorrow. A copy of the order will also be sent by the Registrar General of this Court to the District Judge, Etah, all District Judges in Uttar Pradesh and also to the U.P. Bar Council and Chief Secretary, U.P. The learned standing Counsel will communicate this order forthwith to the District Judge, District Magistrate and Senior Superintendent of Police, Etah for strict compliance, of this order. If the contemnor flouts this order it will be immediately reported to this Court.;