Two Arrested From Courtroom Of Orissa High Court’s Acting Chief Justice For ‘Contemptuous’ Behaviour
In a shockingly unprecedented development, two persons including one litigant got arrested by police from the Courtroom of the Acting Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court for showing unruly and contemptuous behaviour to the Court.While asking the Registrar (Judicial) to register a suo motu contempt case, the Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Dr. Justice Bidyut Ranjan Sarangi and...
In a shockingly unprecedented development, two persons including one litigant got arrested by police from the Courtroom of the Acting Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court for showing unruly and contemptuous behaviour to the Court.
While asking the Registrar (Judicial) to register a suo motu contempt case, the Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Dr. Justice Bidyut Ranjan Sarangi and Justice Murahari Sri Raman observed:
“This Court is conscious of the fact that the jurisdiction in respect of the contempt should be sparingly used. Here in a case where all efforts made by the Court as well as the learned Advocate General went in vain as the contemnors continued to cross the limits of decency.”
The Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Pravat Kumar Padhi and other villagers, who challenged the construction of the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Konark on a piece of land allotted for the said purpose.
To address the needs of people and litigants at large of the villages under Konark Police Station, a decision was taken vide Notification dated 12.11.2014 issued by the Department of Law, Government of Odisha to establish a Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Konark with sitting of the Court at Konark.
For establishment of such Court, the Collector, Puri and the Tahasildar, Gop had taken steps for grant of allotment of land basing on the application made by the District Judge, Puri dated 11.05.2015. Since certain disputes were there, the allotment of land for the purpose of construction of the Court could not be done immediately.
As there was enormous delay in allotment of the land for the Court complex, the Konark Bar Association filed a writ petition for issuance of a direction to the Government for quick settlement of the land for establishment of the Court at Konark. The said writ petition was disposed of by the Court by an order dated 03.11.2020 directing the State authority to provide the land for construction of the Court building.
Since there was non-compliance of the direction made by the Court in the above order, a contempt petition was filed, which was also disposed of by order dated 24.02.2021 as the Government initiated the process for allotment of the land for establishment of Court at Konark.
Before allotment of the said land, all the required procedures for demarcation, de-reservation and alienation of the land were followed and finally the land was allotted in favour of the Law Department, Government of Odisha for construction of the court building of Konark. After taking over the possession of the land, necessary steps were followed to start the construction work.
After the construction work started, the petitioners filed a writ petition challenging alienation process even though they did not raise any objection during the de-reservation and alienation proceedings. The petition was disposed of by the Court asking the concerned Tahasildar to consider the representation filed by the petitioners.
In compliance of the order of the Court, the Tahasildar heard the petitioners and rejected their representation. The petitioner challenged such rejection order on the ground that such order was not a reasoned one. Therefore, the Court ordered the Tahasildar to hear the representation again and to dispose of the same by a reasoned order.
During the pendency of the proceedings before the Tahasildar, the petitioner again filed a contempt petition showing non-compliance of the order of the Court. However, the same was disposed of as the order was complied by the Tahasildar.
Against such disposal, the petitioners preferred a special leave to appeal (SLP) before the Supreme Court, which was dismissed by the Apex Court earlier this month.
Court’s Observations
The PIL matter came up before the Court on Wednesday but no one appeared on behalf of the petitioners. However, it was brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioners along with some other persons are obstructing the construction work of the Court and they have also manhandled persons from the executing agency.
An FIR was registered against the petitioners for the above unlawful activities but they obtained an anticipatory bail from the Court apprehending arrest. The Court resentfully observed that under the protection of such bail, they are continuously hindering the construction work.
When the matter was finally posted on Thursday, the petitioner Pravat Padhi appeared and sought permission to change his lawyer. However, the Court informed him that as the Supreme Court has disposed of all the pending cases, there is nothing remained which is to be adjudicated upon by the High Court.
The above reply from the Bench enraged the petitioner and he started behaving ‘arrogantly’ to the Court. Further, he stated in an ‘unruly’ manner that unless he gets permission from his co-villagers, he cannot withdraw the writ petition and the same cannot be disposed of as well.
At this point of time, the Court asked the petitioner to go out of the Courtroom for some time and get necessary instruction from his co-villagers so that the matter can be disposed of in terms of the order of the Apex Court.
Accordingly, the petitioner went outside and after sometime, came back with a person namely, Duryadhan Sahu, who was not a party to the case. On being asked about his locus-standi, he arrogantly contended that he has helped in filing of the present case and is helping in pursuing the matter.
He instigated the petitioner not to withdraw the petition even if the matter has been dismissed by Apex Court. He ‘arrogantly’ and in a ‘ill-mannered’ fashion tried to justify his action in demeaning the decorum of the Court and expressed his views in derogatory words.
“Though this Court tried to dissuade him from showing such unruly behavior in the Courtroom, he went on passing derogatory remarks against the court. In any case, the conduct of the Petitioner No.1 along with Duryodhan Sahoo (who is a stranger to the case) is absolutely derogatory and deplorable and has caused obstruction in the course of administration of justice,” the Court remarked.
Accordingly, the conduct of the petitioner as well as Duryodhan Sahu was held to be abuse of the process of the Court and contemptuous. The Court called upon the Advocate General of the State Mr. Ashok Kumar Parija to intervene in the matter.
In response to the same, the Advocate General appeared and tried to convince and persuade the contemnors not to conduct themselves in a manner which affects the majesty of the Court. But the contemnors did not pay any heed and remained adamant and went on showing their arrogance and misbehaviour.
Being unsuccessful in pacifying the matter, the Advocate General submitted before the Court that the contemnors should be dealt with according to the procedure laid down under the Contempt of Courts Act.
Accordingly, the Court initiated a suo motu contempt proceeding under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and ordered Inspector-in-Charge of Lalbag Police Station to take the contemnors into custody immediately, which resulted in their arrest from the Courtroom itself.
As far as the PIL was concerned, the same was disposed of in terms of the order of the Supreme Court as there was nothing left in the case to be adjudicated.
Date of Order: October 19, 2023
Counsel for the Petitioners: Petitioner No. 1 in person
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Debakanta Mohanty, Addl. Govt. Advocate; Mr. Shivsankar Mohanty, Advocate for the intervener
Case Title: Pravat Kumar Padhi & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.
Case No: W.P.(C) No. 21030 of 2023