- (1.) All these Suo Motu Rules of Criminal Contempt issued by a Division Bench of this Court presided over by the then Chief Justice were heard analogously as the points involved in these Rules are substantially the same.
(2.) The facts giving rise to issue of these Suo Motu Rules of criminal contempt and the subsequent proceedings till the matters appeared before this Bench may be summarized thus: 1) Four different applications for criminal contempt were filed before the Division Bench presided over by the then Chief Justice of this Court drawing attention of the Bench to the statements alleged to have been made by the three respondents in a meeting held in Kolkata on November 17, 2007 which were published in different newspapers as news-items alleging that those statements made by the respondents in the said meeting amounted to Criminal contempt within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and only the petitioners in one of these four matters (C.P.A.N. 1246 of 2007) prayed for taking suo motu action in terms of Section 15 of the Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India. Those applications were filed without seeking any permission of the learned Advocate General and as already mentioned, in only one of those applications, the prayer was made for taking suo motu action in terms of Section 15 of the Act whereas in the other three, the prayer was couched in ordinary form as made in an application for contempt. 2) The said Division Bench on November 27, 2007 passed the following order on one of those applications: "27.11.07 C.P.A.N. 1246 of 2007 Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, Mr. L.K. Gupta, Mr. B.K. Mukherjee, Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, Mr. Nilotpla Chatterjee. ....For the Petitioners. This petition has been filed by the Bar Association, High Court Calcutta seeking initiation of appropriate contempt proceeding suo motu against (1) Shri Biman Bose, State Secretary of C.P.I. (M) and (3) Shri Shaymal Chakraborlty, Member of State Committee of C.P.I. (M) and President of CITU in exercise of the powers of this Court under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India. We have perused the petition. We have also perused the newspaper reports together with the affidavit affirmed by one Asish Kumar Roy, the petitioner No. 2. In view of the averments contained in the petition, we direct issue of show cause notice to the aforementioned persons. The notice is made returnable on 8th January, 2008. Leave is granted to the petitioner to file supplementary affidavit as also translated copies of the newspaper report. (S.S. NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) Similar orders were also recorded in the order-sheets of the other three applications. 3) On January 11, 2008 when the matters appeared before the said Division Bench, it recorded the following orders: 11.01.08 C.P.A.N. 1246 of 2007 with W.P. 8596 (W) of 2007 Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, Mr. L.K. Gupta, Mr. B.K. Mukherjee, Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, Mr. Nilotpla Chatterjee. ....For the Petitioners. Registrar General is directed to serve a copy of the order dated 27th November, 2007 to the alleged contemnors. The matter will appear in the list two weeks hence. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) 4) On February 1, 2008 the matters again appeared before the said Bench when Their Lordships passed the following order: 01.02.08 C.P.A.N. 1246 of 2007 In W.P. 8596 (W) of 2007 Mr. Idris Ali. ...For the Petitioner. Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Mr. Subrate Mukhopadhyay, Mr. Ravi Sankar Chatterjee, Mr. Kallol Basu, Mr. Bhaskar Ghosh. ...For the Contemnor. Let affidavit-in-opposition to the writ application (sic) be filed within a period of six weeks from date, reply thereto, if any, be filed within one week thereafter. Let the matter appear in the list eight weeks hence. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) 5) Ultimately, the matters appeared on July 11, 2008 when the said Division Bench after going through the affidavits filed by the respondents pursuant to the first order dated November 27, 2007 passed the following order: 11.07.08 C.P.A.N. 1246 of 2007 In W.P. 8596 (W) of 2007 Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, Mr. Kashi Kanta Maitra, Mr. Jayanta Mitra, Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, Mr. Pranab Dutta, Mr. Bilwadal Bhattacharyya. ...For the Petitioners. Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Mr. Subrata Mukhopadhyay, Mr. Rabi Sankar Chattopadhyay, Mr. Kallol Basu, Mr. Bhaskar Ghosh. ...For the Contemnor. We have perused the affidavit filed by the alleged contemnors in Court today. Prima facie we are not satisfied with the contents of the said affidavit. In view of the above let a Contempt Rule be issued upon the alleged contemnors. At this stage Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned senior counsel submits that when the matter was initially moved before this Court, no cognizance of the proceedings were taken by the Court but only a notice was issued to the alleged contemnors. In normal circumstances the Court would have exparte and instantaneously initiated contempt proceedings. Since that course was not adopted and the alleged contemnors were permitted to appear in Court through their counsel, there is sufficient ground that the contemnors should be exempted from appearing in Court in person. We are unable to accept the aforesaid submission. When the contempt petition was presented before the Court it was entirely for the court to decide as to which course is to be adopted. Merely because the Court adopts a cautionary approach would not lead to the conclusion that the court had automatically taken a decision that the petition was in any manner lacking in merit even prima facie. Since the Rule has now been issued, the contemnors would have to be present in accordance with the Rules of this Court unless exempted on a specific application being made on this behalf. Xerox plain copy of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to the learned Counsel for the parties on usual under taking. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE,J.) 6) Consequently, the office drew up the Rules in the following form as it appears from the one drawn in a separate sheet: IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Re: An application for contempt being CPAN 1246 of 2007 In the matter of : The Court on its own Motion Upon reading a petition of Bar Association, High Court, Calcutta and Ors. and their affidavit of verification thereof, dated 26th day of November, 2007 and the exhibits or annexures to the said petition and upon hearing Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, learned Senior counsel on behalf of the petitioners It is ordered that a criminal contempt rule do issue calling upon the alleged contemnors-respondents as stated in the contempt application service through the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta to show cause why they should not be committed to prison or otherwise penalized or dealt with for the acts or conduct by way of making statements which were widely published by print media and electronic media in relation to an order dated 16th November, 2007 passed by this Court in W.P. 8596 (W) of 2007, which are highly derogatory in nature and have the effect of denigrating the dignity and majesty of the Hon'ble High Court and interference with due course of judicial proceedings and the administration of justice. The Rule is made returnable on 8th August, 2008. On the returnable date IT IS ORDERED the alleged contemnors aforesaid shall appear personally before this Court at 10-30 A.M. and shall not leave the Court without permission. Let the Rule be served personally on the alleged contemnors-respondents. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) 7) It further appears from the order of the Division Bench recorded on July 18, 2008 that on mentioning by the learned Advocate for the applicants, the said Division Bench withdrew the Rule earlier drawn up and directed the office to draw up a fresh Rule in form No. 2 by passing the following order: 18.7.08 (Mentioned) Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, Mr. Jayanta Mitra, Mr. S.P. Roychowdhury, Mr. Tapan Kr. Mukherjee. ...For the Petitioner On being mentioned by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner, the earlier Rule drawn on 11th July, 2008 is withdrawn and substituted by the Rule drawn in terms of Form No. 2. (Surinder Singh Nijjar, C.J.) (Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.) 8) Consequently, a new Rule was drawn up as quoted below: IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Appellate Side CRLCP No. 8 of 2008 In the matter of an application of contempt being CPAN 1246 of 2007 for violation of the Court's order dated 16.11.2007 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 8596 (W) of 2007. And in the matter of: Bar Association High Court, Calcutta and Ors. Petitioners 1. Sri Biman Bose, State Secretary of C.P.I. (M) and Chairman of the Left Front having its office at 37, Alimuddin Street, Calcutta, 700017. 2. Sri Binoy Konar, Member of Central committee of C.P.I. (M), having its office at 37, Alimuddin Stree, Calcutta, 700017.
(3.) Sri Shyamal Chakraborty, Member of State Committee of C.P.I. (M) and President of CITU, 37, Alimuddin Street, Calcutta, 700017. Opposite Parties/Contemners To, 1. Sri Biman Bose, State Secretary of C.P.I.(M) and Chairman of the Left Front having its office at 37, Alimuddin Street, Calcutta, 700017. 2. Sri Binoy Konar, Member of Central committee of C.P.I. (M), having its office at 37, Alimuddin Stree, Calcutta, 700017. 3. Sri Shyamal Chakraborty, Member of State Committee of C.P.I. (M) and President of CITU, 37, Alimuddin Street, Calcutta, 700017. Notice is hereby given to you that an application supported by an affidavit (Copy whereof with the Court's order dated 11.07.2008 thereon is enclosed) presented and a rule has been issued on 11.07.2008 which will be heard by the Hon'ble Court on Friday, the 8th day of August 2008 at 10.30 a.m. in the High Court at Calcutta and you are directed to show cause why you should not be committed to prison or otherwise penalized or dealt with for the acts or conduct by way of making statements which were widely published by print media and electronic media in relation to an order dated 16th November, 2007 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 8596 (W) of 2007 which are highly derogatory in nature and have the effect of denigrating the dignity and majesty of the Hon'ble High Court and interference with due course of judicial proceeding and the administration of justice and you are hereby informed that you shall appear personally before this Court on Friday, the 8th day of August 2008 at 10.30 a.m. By order of the High Court. Sd/ dt. 25.7.08 Assistant Registrar, High Court, Appellate Side, Calcutta." S U B P O E N A IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Appellate Side CRLCP No. 9 of 2008 In the matter of an application of contempt being AST 3114 of 2007 for violation of the Court's order dated 16.11.2007 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 8596 (W) of 2007. And in the matter of: Bar Library Club, High Court, Calcutta and Ors. Petitioners 1. Biman Bose 2. Binoy Konar 3. Shyamal Chakraborty, All of 33, Alimuddin Street, Calcutta - 700 016 Opposite Parties/Contemners To, 1. Biman Bose 2. Binoy Konar 3. Shyamal Chakraborty, All of 33, Alimuddin Street, Calcutta - 700 016 Greeting: We command you, that laying all matters aside and notwithstanding and excuse, you personally appear before the court of the Hon'ble Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar, Chief Justice and the Hon'ble Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose on Friday, the 8th day of August 2008 at 10.30 a.m. in the High Court at Calcutta and so on the like manner from day to until you have leave to depart the Court and herein fail not at your peril. Witness: Hon'ble Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar, Chief Justice at Calcutta, aforesaid the 11th July, 2008. Registrar (Administration) High Court, Appellate Side, Calcutta 11.07.2008 CRLCP No. 9 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Re: An Application for contempt being A.S.T. 3114 of 2007 In the matter of : The Court on its own Motion Upon reading a petition of Bar Library Club and Ors. and their affidavit of verification thereof, dated 27th day of November, 2007 and the exhibits or annexures to the said petition and upon hearing Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, learned Senior counsel on behalf of the petitioners. It is order that a criminal contempt rule do issue calling upon the alleged contemnors-respondents as stated in the contempt application service through the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta to show cause why they should not be committed to prison or otherwise penalized or dealt with for the acts or conduct by way of making statements which were widely published by print media and electronic media in relation to an order dated 16th November, 2007 passed by this Court in W.P. 8596 (W) of 2007, which are highly derogatory in nature and have the effect of denigrating the dignity and majesty of the Hon'ble High Court and interference with due course of judicial proceedings and the administration of justice. The Rule is made returnable on 8th August, 2008. On the returnable date IT IS ORDERED the alleged contemnors aforesaid shall appear personally before this Court at 10-30 A.M. and shall not leave the Court without permission. Let the Rule be served personally on the alleged contemnors-respondents. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) S U B P O E N A IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Appellate Side CRLCP No. 10 of 2008 In the matter of an application of contempt being CPAN 1252 of 2007 for making statements which are highly derogatory in nature etc. in relation to an order dated 16.11.2007 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 24456 (W) of 2007. And in the matter of: 1. Rahul Sinha son of Bhupendra Kumar Sinha, General Secretary of West Bengal State Unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party 2. Bhakti Nath Mandal son of Kishori Mohan Mandal, Genral Secretary of the Legal & Legislative Cell of the West Bengal State Unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party, Both of 6, Muralidhar Sen Lane, Kolkata - 700 073 Petitioners Vs. Biman Bose son of Late Dr. R.L. Basu residing at 171/2B, A.J.C. Bose Road, Police Station - Entally, Kolkata - 700 014 being Secretary of the West Bengal State Unit of the Commissioner Party of India (Marxist) having office at 33, Alimuddin Street, Police Station - Taltala, Kolkata - 700 016 and 5 others. Opposite Parties/Contemners To, Biman Bose son of Late Dr. R.L. Basu residing at 1 71/2B, A.J.C. Bose Road, Police Station - Entally, Kolkata - 700 014 being Secretary of the West Bengal State Unit of the Commissioner Party of India (Marxist) having office at 33, Alimuddin Street, Police Station - Taltala, Kolkata - 700 016 Greeting: We command you, that laying all matters aside and notwithstanding and excuse, you personally appear before the court of the Hon'ble Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar, Chief Justice and the Hon'ble Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose on Friday, the 8th day of August 2008 at 10.30 a.m. in the High Court at Calcutta and so on the like manner from day to until you have leave to depart the Court and herein fail not at your peril. Witness: Hon'ble Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar, Chief Justice at Calcutta, aforesaid the 11th July, 2008. Registrar (Administration) High Court, Appellate Side, Calcutta 11.07.2008 CRLCP No. 10 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Re: An Application for contempt being A.S.T. 3114 of 2007 In the matter of : The Court on its own Motion Upon reading a petition of Rahul Sinha and Anr. and their affidavit of verification thereof, dated 23rd day of November, 2007 and the exhibits or annexures to the said petition and upon hearing Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, learned Senior counsel on behalf of the petitioners. It is order that a criminal contempt rule do issue calling upon the alleged contemnor-respondent No. 1 as stated in the contempt application service through the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta to show cause why they should not be committed to prison or otherwise penalized or dealt with for the acts or conduct by way of making statements which were widely published by print media and electronic media in relation to an order dated 16th November, 2007 passed by this Court in W.P. 24456 (W) of 2007, which are highly derogatory in nature and have the effect of denigrating the dignity and majesty of the Hon'ble High Court and interference with due course of judicial proceedings and the administration of justice. The Rule is made returnable on 8th August, 2008. On the returnable date IT IS ORDERED the alleged contemnors aforesaid shall appear personally before this Court at 10-30 A.M. and shall not leave the Court without permission. Let the Rule be served personally on the alleged contemnors-respondents. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.)" S U B P O E N A IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Appellate Side CRLCP No. 11 of 2008 In the matter of an application of contempt being CPAN 1276 of 2007 (AST 3089 of 2007) for making statements which are highly derogatory in nature etc. in relation to an order dated 16.11.2007 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 24456 (W) of 2007. And in the matter of: Sri Idrish Ali, son of Late Abdul Aziz residing at 5, Ripon Lane, Kolkata - 700 016, a practising Advocate of the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta and the President of the All India Minority Forum Petitioner 1. Biman Bose, father name not known of 33, Alimuddin Street, Kolkata 2. Binoy Konar son of Head Quarter of CPIM Political Party of 33, Alimuddin Street, Kolkata, Police Station - Taltala. Respondents /(Contemners) To, 1. Biman Bose father name not known of 33, Alimuddin Street, Kolkata 2. Binoy Konar son of Head Quarter of CPIM Political Party of 33, Alimuddin Street, Kolkata, Police Station - Taltala. Greeting: We command you, that laying all matters aside and notwithstanding and excuse, you personally appear before the court of the Hon'ble Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar, Chief Justice and the Hon'ble Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose on Friday, the 8th day of August 2008 at 10.30 a.m. in the High Court at Calcutta and so on the like manner from day to until you have leave to depart the Court and herein fail not at your peril. Witness: Hon'ble Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar, Chief Justice at Calcutta, aforesaid the 11th July, 2008. Registrar (Administration) High Court, Appellate Side, Calcutta 11.07.2008 CRLCP No. 11 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Contempt) Re: An Application for contempt being CPAN 1276 of 2007 In the matter of : The Court on its own Motion Upon reading a petition of Idris Ali and his affidavit of verification thereof, dated 20th day of November, 2007 and the exhibits or annexures to the said petition and upon hearing Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, learned Senior counsel on behalf of the petitioner. It is order that a criminal contempt rule do issue calling upon the alleged contemnors-respondents as stated in the contempt application service through the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta to show cause why they should not be committed to prison or otherwise penalized or dealt with for the acts or conduct by way of making statements which were widely published by print media and electronic media in relation to an order dated 16th November, 2007 passed by this Court in W.P. 24456 (W) of 2007, which are highly derogatory in nature and have the effect of denigrating the dignity and majesty of the Hon'ble High Court and interference with due course of judicial proceedings and the administration of justice. The Rule is made returnable on 8th August, 2008. On the returnable date IT IS ORDERED the alleged contemnors aforesaid shall appear personally before this Court at 10-30 A.M. and shall not leave the Court without permission. Let the Rule be served personally on the alleged contemnors-respondents. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) 9) Ultimately, on August 5, 2008, the Rule appeared on the returnable day when the Division Bench passed the following order: 05.08.08 C.P.A.N. 1246 of 2007 In W.P. 8596 (W) of 2007 + C.R.L.C.P. 8 of 2008 Mr. Bimal Kumar Chatterjee, Mr. Jayanta Mitra, Mr. S.P. Mukherjee, Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, Mr. Pranab Dutta, Mr. Bilwadal Bhattacharyya. ....For the Petitioners. Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Mr. Subrata Mukhopadhyay, Mr. R.S. Chattopadhyay, Mr. Kallol Basu, Mr. Bhaskar Ghosh. ....For the Contemnors. Pursuant to the order dated 11th July, 2008 all the contemnors are present in Court today. An application has been made for exemption from personal appearance of the contemnors. We have considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel. An unconditional undertaking has been given by the contemnors to remain present in Court as and when directed by the Court. In view of the above, the contemnors are hereby granted exemption from personal appearance with a direction to remain present as and when directed as undertaken by them in Court today. Let affidavit-in-opposition to the Contempt application be filed within a period of eight weeks from date, reply thereto, if any, be filed within one week after the Puja Vacation. Let the matter be listed for hearing on 6th November, 2008. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) 10) Subsequently, when the matter appeared on November 27, 2008 on the prayer of the original petitioner, the time to file affidavit-in-reply was extended till further two weeks by passing the following order: 27.11.08 C.R.L.C.P. 8 of 2008 C.P.A.N. 1246 of 2007 In W.P. 8596 (W) of 2007 Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, Mr. Kashi Kanta Maitra, Mr. Jayanta Mitra, Mr. Tapan Kumar Mukherjee, Mr. Pranab Datta, Mr. Bilwadal Bhattacharyya. ...For the Petitioners. Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Mr. Subrata Mukhopadhyay, Mr. Rabi Sankar Chattopadhyay, Mr. Kallol Basu, Mr. Bhaskar Ghosh. ...For the Contemnor. As prayed for, time to file affidavit-in-reply is extended by two weeks. Let the matter appear in the list after X'mas vacation. (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, C.J.) (PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) 11) Thereafter, the matter appeared before the said Division Bench presided over by the then Chief Justice on different dates but the matter was adjourned and ultimately went out of list. Subsequently, the matter appeared before this Bench and on December 14, 2009 the hearing of the Rules commenced before us. 3. Before we enter into the merit of the Rules, it will be appropriate to refer to the alleged statements made by the three respondents as would appear from the averments made in paragraph 4 of the application of the Bar Association, High Court and also from the Annexures being "D", "E", and "F" to the application where the English translated versions of the statements allegedly made by the Respondents have been quoted. The entire paragraph 4 and those three Annexures are quoted below:;