- (1.) AMAR Saran and S. C. Nigam, JJ. Heard Shri R. R. Singh, learned Coun sel for the applicant and Shri Zaffar Abbas, learned Counsel appearing for the opposite party-noticee, Shri Mohammad Babar, In spector, police station Bilari, District Moradabad and perused the record of the case.
(2.) THIS criminal miscellaneous con tempt application has been moved for drawing contempt proceedings against the noticee for having violated an order of this Court dated 24. 5. 2004 whereby this Court had stayed the criminal proceedings in case No. 25 of 2003, under sections 467, 468, 420 IPC against the applicant. In spite of the said order the applicant was arrested by the noticee on 8. 4. 2007. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the same amounts to flagrant violation of the order of this Court. Learned Counsel for the respondent noticee has drawn our attention to Annexure-6 to the contempt application filed by the applicant, which is an order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Mag istrate, Court No. 2, Moradabad in case No. 2463 of 2005 (State v. Netrapal Singh and others ). The said order clearly mentioned that the order of the High Court dated 24. 5. 2004, of which the learned Magistrate showed utmost respect, was filed in the Court on 9. 4. 2007 and that prior to this date, on 17. 3. 2004 and 24. 5. 2004, he had already issued non-bailable warrants in this case.
(3.) HOWEVER, learned Counsel for the applicant seeks to argue that even though the order was not filed before the Court concerned after it was passed by the High Court, but it was handed over to the SP and CO of the police station, Bilari. Interestingly, in paragraph 9, it is not even mentioned as to when the said order was handed over to the SP and CO of police station Bilari. Therefore, there is no reason for us to presume that the said order was handed over to the noticee prior to the date of his effecting the arrest.;