High CourtsSingle Bench

Alfred Karthak vs District Collector-Cum-Chairman Disaster Management & Ors.

Sikkim High Court · Decided on 30 March 2026 · Citation: (2026) 03 SIK CK 1286

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J
CASE NUMBER
Contempt Case (C) No. 05 Of 2025

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 161 words

Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J

1.

The learned counsel for respondent no.4 submits that the Vakalatnama of his Senior, Ms. Gita Bista has been filed in the Registry. The same is taken on record.

2.

The learned counsel for respondent no.4 points out that the photographs filed along with the contempt petition, particularly Annexure P4 are not clear and do not depict what the petitioner intends to reflect in the contempt petition. A perusal of Annexure P4 satisfies this Court that an unclear picture has been filed by the petitioner. If the object of filing of the photographs is to show to this Court that the photographs depict the true picture and there was no restoration work done as directed by this Court the same should be clear.

3.

In such view of the matter, the petitioner is granted an opportunity to re-file clear, digital coloured photographs depicting the relevant picture within a period of two weeks.

4.

List thereafter, on 22.04.2026.