'Won't File Reply Unless Mobile Phone Is Given' : Man Facing Contempt Case Insists; Supreme Court Extends His Custody

The Supreme Court today sent back into custody a man against whom non-bailable warrants were issued earlier for non-deposit of cost of Rs.1 lakh as well as deliberate, repetitive failure to appear before the Court.

Passing the order, a Bench of Justices CT Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal directed that he be provided all relevant documents by jail authorities to enable him to file for a reply, if he chooses to do so. The matter is now listed for framing of charge, till which time the alleged contemnor is to remain in custody.

To state the facts briefly, initially, the man (Upendra Nath Dalai) had filed a "public interest litigation" (PIL) to declare Satsang founder Sree Sree Thakur Anukulchandra a "parmatma". This PIL was dismissed by the top Court, while imposing an exemplary cost of Rs.1 lakh. The following observation was made at the time,

"India is a secular country and the petitioner cannot be permitted to pray that the citizens of India may accept Sri Sri Thakur Anukul Chandra as Paramaatma (supreme spirit)".

However, Dalai failed to deposit the cost of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on him. As a result, the present suo motu contempt case came to be initiated by the Court last year. In September, Dalai wrote an email to the Court saying,

"I decline to appear in court in this matter as per this case no. because this is a useless notice from you to me. This is a disrespectful act of yours towards me. Because of the contempt notice you issued to me is baseless. I have filed an MA case seeking stay against the contempt proceedings ...You have knowingly disregarded the Constitution of India and unfairly issued this notice to me on 23.01.2023, when I had no defect in my Miscellaneous application file. Is it worth it? So first you register my MA file. Then notice will be posted as per time. I will then be present at the Hon'ble Court. Therefore, the hearing of this case is requested to be quashed.”

On October 9, 2023, as his presence could not be secured, the Court issued a bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.20,000/- against Dalai. Service report of the bailable warrant indicated that he was not found at his address and was absconding.

In this backdrop, a non-bailable warrant was issued in January this year. This led to Dalai's arrest and production before the Court. On March 4, the Court was not inclined to grant bail, but gave him time to file reply. He was directed to remain in custody till next date.

Today, when Dalai was produced in Court and it was enquired as to whether he had written the above-mentioned email himself, he replied in the affirmative. 

The hearing turned on the issue of providing mobile phone access to Dalai to enable him to file a reply. Initially, the Bench was inclined to grant him access to his mobile phone (which is deposited at a police station) in presence of a police official. However, considering the possibility of misuse of the opportunity, it was decided that all required documents (review petition, curative petition, etc.) shall be provided to Dalai by the authorities.

Justice Bindal: Aapko kaunse documents chahiye mobile se? (which documents do you want from the mobile?)

Dalai: Mobile mei, is case ka jo [...], jitna order hai...aur jo petition... (in the mobile, this case's [...] orders...and the petition)

Justice Bindal: Aapne toh jawab iska dena hai na ki aap appear nahi hue aur aapne bail daali hai...[...] khatam ho gaya, uski toh aap par cost lag gayi thi...uske baad ke conduct ka aapne jawab dena hai (you have to reply on the fact that you did not appear and have applied for bail... [...] is finished, cost was imposed on you...you have to answer on conduct thereafter)

Dalai: Cost lagaya tha aur maine usko review kia tha... (cost was imposed and I reviewed it)

Justice Ravikumar (interjecting): Review is to be done by the court, not by you...you can file an application but hitherto no client is having the right to review

Justice Bindal: Aapko ek review ki copy chahiye, ek apko curative chahiye, ek jo aapne email bheji hai wo chahiye (you need a copy of the review, the curative, the email that you sent)

Dalai: Mobile milega toh... (if mobile is given...)

Justice Bindal: Mobile aise nahi milta...Aapko 4 documents chahiye, yahin se hum de denge (mobile is not given in this manner...you need 4 documents, we will give from here only)

Dalai: Mobile nahi denge to kaise [...] (if mobile is not given, how...)

Justice Bindal: Wo aapko sochna hai (that you have to think)

Dalai: Thik hai sir, ab jitne saal [...] jail hai custody mei rahunga...uske baad bhi rahunga (alright, sir, however many years [...] jail is there, I will remain in custody...will remain after that also)

Justice Bindal: Then you deserve it

Justice Ravikumar: why don't we straightaway go for initiating contempt proceedings...we thought that you should be given an opportunity...if that is the attitude...

Pursuant to the exchange, it was recorded in the order that Dalai was unwilling to accept documents from the Court, which would be sufficient to file reply, and was adamant that he'd only prepare a reply if he is given his phone. It was added that he was prepared to remain in jail till the time he was provided the mobile phone.

Taking into account Dalai's attitude, the matter was listed for framing of charge. "Produce him on Wednesday. We will frame the charge and then nothing can be done. He is inviting, let it be", the Court said.

Case Title: In Re: Contempt Against Upendra Nath Dalai | SMC (C) No(s).3/2023 (and connected matter)

Click Here To Read/Download Order