ADVOCATE GENERAL ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. A V KOTESWARA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This contempt application has been filed by the Advocate General against the respondent who was acting as an Additional District and Sessions Judge at Cuddapah. I do not propose to mention the various allegations made in the Contempt application but it is sufficient to say that the allegation is that the action of the respondent on 16-4-82 and 4-5-82 amounted to contempt of a stay order granted by this court on 15-4-82 in Crl. MP. 835/82 in Crl. MP 834/82. This contempt application has been filed in the High Court on 2-11-82 and was posted before a learned co-single Judge on 3-12-82 who was the same Judge who passed the stay orders on 15-4-82 and therefore he directed that the contempt case be posted before another learned judge. Thereafter this contempt petition was posted before another learned judge on 7-12-82 who adjourned the matter for a period of six months. Thereafter the petition was first listed before me on 24-6-83 and the learned Advocate General requested for an adjournment by four weeks which was granted by me. The matter was again posted on 19-8-83 and on that day I issued notice before admission and Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, Advocate appeared for the respondent and stated that the petition cannot be proceeded with inasmuch as a period of one year has elapsed from the date of the alleged contempt and relied upon Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter called the 1971 Act). Thereafter I heard the matter on 23-8-83, 9-9-83 and 16-9-83. That is how it has become necessary to decide the question of limitation.

(2.) Two questions arise in this case. The first one is whether the period of limitation prescribed by Section 20 of the 1971 Act is attracted to cases of contempt of the High Court which is a Court of Record under Art. 215 of the Constitution of India. The second question is : Whether for purposes of Section 20 of 1971 Act the material date was the date of filing of the contempt application or the date of initiation of the contempt proceedings and as to what is meant by initiation. I shall now deal with these two questions.

(3.) The first question that arises for consideration in the contempt application is whether the provisions of Section 20 of the Contempt of courts Act, 1971 prescribing a period of limitation for initiation of a contempt proceeding applies to contempts of the High Court which is a Court of Record. S. 20 of the contempt of Courts Act, 1971 reads as follows :-