Delhi High Court Says Contempt Action For Attack On Local Commissioners Maintainable As They Are An Extension Of Court

Mr. Varun Goswami, acting as Amicus Curaie, submitted before the court that the incident in question marked a contempt of the Delhi High Court’s order, whereby LCs were appointed to visit Calcutta and carry out Court directions, not of any subordinate court.

The Bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Shalinder Kaur agreed with the same and disregarded the reliance placed by certain respondents on the proviso of Section 10, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which states that “no High Court shall take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code”.

Notably, the criminal contempt proceedings were initiated pursuant to an attack on 11 LCs appointed by the Delhi High Court to visit various locations in Calcutta and prepare an inventory of counterfeit products allegedly being sold under the trademark ‘SAMSUNG’.

It was reported that three LCs were badly bruised alongwith two police officers. A criminal case was registered and is pending before the local Calcutta Court. Charges to yet to be framed.

Sr. Adv. Soumya Chakraborty, who appeared for Kolkata police before the Division Bench, called the incident a “murderous attack on judiciary”. He informed that one policeman had even got his spine injured in the incident.

The Bench directed respondent Nos.17-28, who are arraigned in the criminal case registered in Calcutta, to personally remain present in court on the next date. It also ordered for a representative of Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., original plaintiff in CS(OS) 4024/2014 at whose behest LCs were appointed, to remain present.

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. M/s Obssiobn Naaz & Ors., CONT.CAS(CRL) 3/2015