ABDUL MAJEED PURESHI Vs. BENOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Rule, it has been alleged by the petitioners, who are either the agents or representatives of a Company of U.P. and is in the business of import and export of Dried castings, that the contemner opposite party, in spite of due communication of an order of injunction as issued by this Court in Civil Rule No.8760 (W) of 1979, has wilfully violated the same or has not taken steps pursuant to such order, negligently. The particulars of the concerned interim order, the violation whereof, has been alleged, are mentioned hereafter.

(2.) It was alleged that following some unlawful activities, which were indulged in or resorted by the employees and that too without justifiable reasons or grounds, the petitioners had suffered much and as such, they had no other alternative, but to issue a notice on 21st June 1979, requiring the erring employees, not indulge in such activities, which were causing loss and prejudice to the concern, with a further request to them, to allow the smooth running of the business.

(3.) The above notice, according to the petitioners, produced no result or effect and as such, they on subsequent and diverse dates, made further appeals to the employees to bring about normalcy in the business and to restore normal working conditions in the godown of the petitioners at premises No. 10, Meher Ali Lane, Calcutta-15 (hereinafter referred to as the said premises). It has been alleged that things and conditions at the said premises were going from bad to worse and the appeals as mentioned above, did not produce any result. As such, a diary, being G.D. Entry No.2123, was lodged with the Entally Police Station, on 23rd June 1979, as the said premises was within the jurisdiction of the said Police Station. This diary was followed by the filling of other General Diaries and ultimately, a complaint under section 144 of the Criminal Procedure code, had to be filed by the petitioners, as it was felt that those successive diaries produced no result or effect on the illegal, irregular and unauthorised activities of the employees required an order for restraining their employees Sarvashree Md. Yasin, Hanif, Sadique, Gobordhan, Moula Bux, Sardar Hanif and 14 others and their aides, agents, associates and/or collaborators from continuing with their activities as mentioned hereinbefore and further praying for a direction on the Officer-in-Charge of the Entally Police Station, to post police pickets at the gate of the said premises, so that no obstruction was created by the miscreants as mentioned above, from removing the finished goods and further more, the goods were not damaged or any act of action was taken or committed, which could be harmful to the petitioners or their officers or to any body. It appears that in that proceedings, the learned Executive Magistrate, Sealdah, directed the Officer-in-Charge concerned, to enquire and report by 2nd July, 1979, and he was further directed to see that no breach of peace took place at the said premises. It further appears that on consideration of the Police Report as made, the learned Executive Magistrate, issued notice to the opposite parties in the proceedings before him, asking them thus to show cause why proceedings under section 144 should not be drawn up against them. The next date of hearing was fixed on 9th August, 1979.