R. N. Misra, J. - (1.) -Heard Sri Jyoti Swaroop Singh, Advocate, (Contemnor) in person and learned A.G.A. for the State at length and perused the written argument filed by the contemnor.
(2.) THIS reference for drawing contempt proceeding against Sri Jyoti Swaroop Singh, advocate practising in District Courts, Allahabad, had been received on the report of Sri Pradip Singh, Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allahabad, addressed to the Registrar General of this Court and forwarded by District Judge, Allahabad, vide endorsement No. 1514/XV dated 24.9.2005. After receiving the letter of officer concerned, the office of this Court submitted a note dated 15.10.2005 for initiating contempt proceeding against the aforesaid contemnor and the above note was endorsed by Hon'ble Administrative Judge concerned on 26.10.2005 requesting Hon'ble the Chief Justice to order for initiation of contempt proceeding, who permitted so vide order dated 27.10.2005 and consequently this proceeding was initiated. The letter of Sri Pradip Singh for initiating contempt proceedings against the contemnor reads as under : From : Pradip Singh Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allahabad. To, The Registrar General, Hon'ble High Court of Judicature At Allahabad. Through the District Judge, Allahabad. Subject : Reference under Section 15 (2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for the request of initiation of criminal contempt of court proceedings against Sri Jyoti Swaroop Singh, son of late Vanshpati Singh, Advocate, District Court, Allahabad. Sir, "Most respectfully it is submitted as under : 1. That the facts constituting the background are that Sri Jyoti Swarup Singh, advocate is a practising lawyer at District Court Allahabad and junior of Sri Subedar Singh advocate one of the alleged contemnor in Criminal Contempt Case No. 25/04, Administrative Judge, Allahabad v. Jagat Pal Singh and others. The said Sri Jyoti Swaroop Singh is a trouble maker, quarrelsome and mischievous advocate who has always been pressurizing the judicial officers, in order to seek favourable orders by making false, frivolous concocted and baseless complaints against them and later on compromising the matters. He had made hundreds of such false complaints against various judicial officers, court officials and local residents out of which only a few came to my knowledge. He made false and frivolous complaints against Sri Sarvesh Kumar, Smt. Vani Ranjan Agarwal and Sri Vikas Saxena all the then Additional Chief Judicial Magistrates, Allahabad, in the years 2000, 2003 and 2005 respectively. As well as he is an accused and complainant in some of these cases viz., Criminal Case Nos. 1088/04, 2094/04, 2212/04 under Sections 352, 504, 147, 506, 323 and 324, I.P.C. and F.R. No. 214/04, 436/04 and 250/04 which go to show that the said Jyoti Swaroop Singh is habitual to make false complaint and misusing the law process being an advocate. (Copies of relevant documents of these cases and complaints are annexed herewith as Annexures-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. 2. That on 31.8.2005, while hearing cases in the Court at about 12.45 p.m., the said Jyoti Swaroop Singh advocate entered the court room in a very angry mood and losing control started shouting loudly saying : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... (Why have you not allowed application under Section 156 (3), Cr. P.C. How have you dared to pass an order to register it as a complaint rather than allowing it in toto. I will make complaints against you and teach you the lesson. Perhaps you don't know my powers'. I tried to pacify him but he was reluctant to be cool. The said counsel/ contemnor has been asked to explain as to why not the matter be referred to Hon'ble Court for action against him. At this he became very furious and questioning the authority of the Court said that he has already seen a lot of such contempt cases and he shall not bow down before anybody at any cost. Meanwhile some advocates accompanied him outside the Court. 3.That the conduct of the said counsel Sri Jyoti Swaroop Singh, advocate has been to pressurize the Court to seek favourable orders. The language spoken by the said counsel in the Court is absolutely contemptuous and amounting to scandalizing, lowering and insulting the authority of the Court as well as obstructing and interfering with the administration of justice and against the normal flow of the stream of justice in the pending matters which falls within the four corners of the meaning of the contempt of court. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is requested Your Honour, that the matter may be placed before Hon'ble Court for appropriate action against the aforesaid contemnor under the Contempt of Court Act, 1971." Sri Jyoti Swaroop Singh, advocate filed objection with affidavit against the reference made by the officer concerned. In his affidavit, he denied the entire story given in the said letter. He has alleged his false implication in this case. He has further alleged that he had made a complaint against this officer to District Judge, Allahabad and as a counter-blast, the officer concerned made this reference. He has further alleged that the officer concerned rejected his application under Section 156 (3), Cr. P.C. in a mala fide way whereas other applications of other counsels and parties on similar facts were being allowed by him in the past. He has also denied that he was ever junior to Sri Subedar Singh, advocate. He has also denied that he had ever misbehaved with any officer named in the reference letter. Some annexures have been filed alongwith the affidavit.
(3.) ON the basis of allegations made in the reference letter, the following charge was framed against the contemnor vide order dated 7.2.2006. "That you on 31.8.2005, in the court of Sri Pradip Singh, Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allahabad, who was hearing cases in the Court at about 12.45 p.m., entered into the Court room in a very angry mood and losing control started shouting loudly : "Tumne prarthna patra 156 (3), Cr. P.C. par oose pariwad ke roop mein darj karne ka adesh kyon parit kiya, ouse swikar kyon nahin kiya, Mai tumhari shikayat karoonga, Tumhe naukri karna sikha doonga, Tum Mujhe jante nahin." The Presiding Officer tried to pacify you, but you were reluctant to be cool and you were asked by the Presiding Officer to explain your conduct for referring the matter to the Hon'ble High Court for initiating action against you, you became very furious and questioned the authority of the Court saying that you had seen a lot of such complaints in the past also and will not bow down before any body or authority at any cost. Your above conduct was with the intent to scandalize and lower down the dignity of the Court and amounted to interference and obstructions in the administration of justice constituting an offence under Section 2 (c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and punishable under Section 12 of the said Act and you are charged accordingly. You are hereby directed to be tried by this Court on the said charge." Sri Pradip Singh appeared in the witness box and corroborated the contents of reference letter. He has stated that he joined in Allahabad Judgeship on 20.12.2003. The contemnor used to appear in his Court as counsel, therefore, he was known to him. Prior to the incident in question, the contemnor had abused him twice in his Court when the orders were passed against him, but to avoid tussle, he did not take any action against him. On 31.8.2005 at 12.45 p.m., when he was hearing a civil case, the contemnor appeared in his Court. Earlier to this, the application under Section 156 (3), Cr. P.C. moved by him had been ordered to be registered as complaint. He expressed his annoyance regarding said order, passed on his application and threatened him to make a complaint against him and to teach him way of doing service. The relevant word and sentence uttered by him are quoted below : ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The contemnor remained shouting in the Court for 3-4 minutes and so many lawyers and litigants assembled there. When the Presiding Officer told him that he would initiate contempt proceedings against him, the contemnor said that he has seen so many contempt proceedings. The work of the Court was paralyzed. Since the Presiding Officer was insulted in the Court, this was set back to him.;