Court on its Own Motion vs Sh. M.S. Sanghi, Advocate, Narnaul

S.S. Dewan, J.—This is the second occasion that the Respondent Shri M.B. Sanghi. Advocate, has been said to have committed contempt of Court. On the last occasion, the proceedings for contempt has been initiated against him in pursuance of a report made by Shri K. K. Chopra, the then Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narnaul and Shri Sanghi in C. O. C .P No. 12 of 1983, Court on its own Motion v. M. B. Sanghi, Advocate, tendered an unqualified apology, in the High Court and the rule against him was therefore, discharged.

On the present occasion, a report was submitted by Shri S. R. Sharma, Sub Judge 2nd Class, Narnaul, dated September 25, 1985, to the District & Sessions Judge, Narnaul. The District Judge has submitted to this Court, a report dated October 12, 1985, for taking action against Shri M. B. Sanghi. On the report submitted by the District Judge, Shri M. B Sanghi was directed to show as to why he should not be proceeded against for contempt of Court. This order was dated December 19, 1985.

Now, the circumstances in which the Respondent has been asked to show-cause why he should not be proceeded against for contempt of Court, may be shortly stated.

On 20th September, 1985, the learned Senior Sub Judge, Narnaul, entrusted a civil suit Hari Ram v. Municipal Committee to Shri S. R. Sharma Sub Judge II Class, Narnaul, for disposal in accordance with law On that day Shri M B Sanghi, Advocate, appeared for the Plaintiff and orally prayed for ex parte ad interim stay but that request was declined by Shri S. R. Sharma and he ordered for issuance of notice to the Defendants for 24 9.1985. On the date fixed i. e. 24.9.1985, Shri Banwari Lal Sharma, Advocate appeared for the Defendants and requested for a date for filing reply to the said application which was not opposed by Shri M. B. Sanghi. However, he insisted that ad interim stay should be granted to the Plaintiff. Shri S. R. Sharma told him that the question of granting him ad interim stay would be considered after filing of the reply by the Defendants and adjourned the case for 26.9.1985. Shri M. B. Sanghi, Advocate, was not satisfied with it and used the language derogatory to the Court. He uttered the following words as mentioned at ''A'' to ''A'' of the letter Ex. PA sent by Shri S. R. Sharma to the District Judge, Narnual, for necessary action:

Your are wholly favouring the Municipal Committee. Are you sitting as Judge or as Administrator of Municipal Committee. To me it seems that you are deciding the case as Administrator of Municipal Committee. You are acting as, if you are a contractor of the Municipal Committee. I do not expect any justice from you; I do not think that you will grant stay to me as you are fully siding with the municipal committee. You are not granting stay to me as you are in collusion with the Deputy Commissioner and under his (Deputy Commissioner) influence, you do not want to grant stay to me and that he will complain against me to the Hon''ble High Court.

It was in these circumstances that this Court issued a notice upon Shri M. B. Sanghi to show-cause as to why he should not be convicted for contempt of Court in respect of the as-persions which he made against the then Sub Judge, Narnaul, as already stated, has appeared in person and is represented by Shri M L. Sarin Advocate, who has filed reply by way of affidavit in this Court signed by Shri M. B. Sanghi. In reply Shri M. B. Sanghi has denied the allegations made against him by Shri S. R. Sharma, Sub Judge 2nd Class, Narnaul and prayed that in case he had committed contempt of Court, then an unqualified apology may be accepted and the rule for contempt be discharged.

6 The question for decision in this case is whether the alleged as-persions made against a Judge fall within the ambit of criminal contempt as defined in Section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short, the Act'') Section 2(c)(i) is as under ; -

2.-In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires -

(a) ...............

(b) .............

(c) ''criminal contempt'' means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which

(i) scandalises or tends to scandalise or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or

The case of Shri S. R. Sharma II Class, Narnaul in his affidavit as well as in the Court was that on 24th September, 1985 when Shri Banwari Lal Sharma Advocate appeared for the Defendants and requested for a date for filing reply to the application for temporary injunction moved by the contemner, the latter insisted that ad interim stay should be granted to his client on the same day. That request of the contemner was. however, declined by Shri S. R. Sharma. There is no controversy with regard to these facts but the parties are at variance as to what was the tone and the manner of address and what were its contents. Shri S. R. Sharma (CW.2) and his Reader Krishan Kumar Sharma (CW.3) had characterised the manner and the tone of address of the contemner as contemptuous delivered on the top of his voice in an excited and violent manner whereas the contemner asserted that he made submissions with great respect and humility and examined his colleagues Sarvshri Banwari Lal Sharma and Gian Chand Sharma Advocate in support of this version. The contemner himself, however, did not come into the witness-box to controvert the allegations made against him. Shri Gian Chand Sharma, Advocate appearing for the contemner had clearly admitted in cross-examination that in some earlier case while appearing in the Court of Shri K. K. Chopra, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narnaul, the contemner had made some disparaging remarks against said Court. We, therefore, find that the contemner is addicted to using contemptuous language and making scurrilous attacks on the the Judges. On the evidence adduced, we have no doubt that the contemner attacked the integrity of the learned Sub Judge saying that he was a contractor of the Municipal Committee; that he was in collusion with the Deputy Commissioner and that he was under his influence. The attack made on the learned Sub Judge disparaging in character and derogatory to his dignity would vitally shake the confidence of the public in him. The aspersions made against him were much more than merely insult and, in fact, they scandalise the Court in such a way as to create distrust in the people''s mind and impair confidence of the people in Court.

After a careful consideration of the matter, we are of the view that the contemner Shri M. B. Sanghi has brought himself clearly within the ambit of the contempt of Court and he is accordingly found guilty u/s 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The learned Counsel for the contemner tendered apology and in the show-cause petition it was also done so in the event of his being found guilty. He submitted that generosity, forgiveness and pardon should be the criteria in such cases.

Apology must, in order to dilute the gravity of the offence, be voluntary, unconditional and indicative of remorse and contrition and should be tendered at the earnest opportunity. It was observed in Sub Judge, First Class, AIR 1940 407 (Nagpur) by his Lordship Vivian Bose:

There appears to be an impression abroad that an apology consists of magic formula of words which has but to be uttered as an incantation at the last possible moment when all else has failed and it is evident that retribution is inevitable, to stave off punishment. It appears to be felt that a man should be free to continue unfounded attacks upon another''s honour and character and integrity with the utmost license till the last possible moment and then when he is unable to stave off the consequences of his infamous conduct any longer, all he need so is to wave this magic formula referred to as an apology in a Judge''s face in order to emerge triumphantly from the fray. Nothing can be further from the truth. An apology is not a weapon of defence forged to purge the guilty of their offences.......... It is intended to be evidence of real contriteness, the manly consciousness of a wrong done, of an injury inflicted and the earnest desire to make such reparation as lies in the wrong-doer''s power. Only then is it of any avail in a court of justice .............. Mere lip service to formula without any contrition of heart will not do.

It was observed in (s) M.Y. Shareef and Another Vs. The Hon''ble Judges of The High Court of Nagpur and Others, :

An apology is not a weapon of defence to purge the guilty of their offence; nor is it intended universal penancea, but it is intended to be evidence of real contriteness.

The aspersions at ''A'' to ''A'' of the letter Ex. P.A. were made by the contemner with a design and were not simply thoughtless. These days such incidents of insubordination and use of improper language towards the Judges is on the increase. A litigant and a lawyer have to know and understand the stage where they have to stop their critism of the Judges and also have to be watchful about the language in which the critism has been couched. In a case of this type which is serious, the contemner cannot be allowed to get away by simply feeling sorry by way of apology as the easiest way. In the special circumstances of this case, we do not accept the apology tendered by Shri M S. Sanghi, Advocate.

For the foregoing reasons, Shri M. B. Sanghi Advocate, has been proved guilty for committing the contempt of Court u/s 2(c)(i) of the Act. He is convicted for this offence accordingly and sentenced to pay Rs. 1,000/- as fine. In case of default of payment of fine Shri M. B. Sanghi shall undergo simple imprisonment for 7 days. The fine shall be deposited within one month from today.

K.S. Tiwana, J.

I agree.