Honble MATHUR, J.–This is a suo moto contempt proceedings under Section 15 (2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, hereinafter referred-to as ``the Act, registered by order of this court dated 5.2.99 against contemner respondent Hemraj, for contemptuous statement made by him against the ``Judiciary in his representation dated 23.12.1998 addressed to Honble Chief Minister and Law Minister of the State of Rajasthan. In response to the notice, he appeared before this court on 7.4.99. On his request, the court directed the Dy. Registrar (Judicial) to supply the copy of the order dated 5.2.99 and such other relevant documents as may be available in the proceedings and are claimed by him. He was also permitted to make inspection of the proceedings and demand such copies as are necessary for him to defend himself in the contempt proceedings. The registry complied with the order dated 7.4.99. The respondent has not made any grievance with respect to compliance of the order dated 7.4.1999. The case was adjourned to 7.05.1999. He did not appear on 7.5.99. Thus, a bailable warrant was issued to secure his presence, returnable on 23.8.1999. The case was adjourned from time to time as the warrant could not be executed on the respondent. The Superintendent of Police, Kota was directed to depute a responsible officer to get the bailable warrant executed on the respondent. Ultimately on 22.3.2000, the respondent appeared before this court. The Court asked him if needs the services of a lawyer, which can be arranged at the State expenses. He declined and claimed himself an expert on the Law of Contempt. He also submitted that there is nothing in his representation dt. 23.12.98, addressed to the Honble Chief Minister and Honble Law Minister of State of Rajasthan, which constitutes an offence of criminal contempt. He asked us to point out the contents from the representation, which constitutes an offence of criminal contempt. The Court read over the accusations as contained in paras 9, 12, 13, 14 and 15(b) and the relief claimed. He also read said paras with the Court and marked them, as directed by the court. He sought time for filing the reply and to argue the matter. The case was adjourned to 4.4.2000. (2). We have heard contemner respondent Hemraj and Mr. R.P. Vyas, learned Additional Advocate General. (3). The contents of representation dt. He also read said paras with the Court and marked them, as directed by the court. He sought time for filing the reply and to argue the matter. The case was adjourned to 4.4.2000. (2). We have heard contemner respondent Hemraj and Mr. R.P. Vyas, learned Additional Advocate General. (3). The contents of representation dt. 23.12.98, addressed to the Honble Chief Minister and Honble Law Minister of the Government of Rajasthan, by contemner Hemraj, are summarised as follows: (4). The contemner claimes to be an Engineering Graduate. He established an industry in the name of `Bhartiya Engineering Services at Kota after taking loan from the different financial institutions. The party No.1 in the representation i.e. Murarilal Goyal has been described as an owner of the plot, on which he established his factory. It is averred that the first party is a Gazetted Officer in the Telephone Department. He is competent to influence the public servants. It is alleged that on 6.1.1989, an accident took place in which four employees of his industry were seriously injured. The accident took place because of the negligence of the second and third party namely J.K. Synthetics Ltd. and Orient Transport Company. However, the matter was somehow hushed up by the police under the influence of second and third parties. It is also averred that the first party asked him to enhance the rent of the plot from 1600/-to 1900/-. He malafidely got the electric and water connections disconnected. He also sent certain `Gundaas on the premises of the industry. He filed a suit for temporary injunction in the civil court in the year 1989. By interim order, disconnection was restored subject to payment of rent and water charges. He has given details of the civil and criminal cases concerning him. In para 9, he has stated that in a suit for eviction by the first party, the court determined the rent. He preferred an appeal against the said order before the High Court. However, the first party abusing the judicial proceeding got his appeal dismissed. The contempt proceedings before the civil court were also somehow got disposed of. He made a complaint against the Presiding Officer of the Civil Court to the Registrar Vigilance of the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur but the said complaint has been hushed-up (jQk-nQk) by the High Court. However, the first party abusing the judicial proceeding got his appeal dismissed. The contempt proceedings before the civil court were also somehow got disposed of. He made a complaint against the Presiding Officer of the Civil Court to the Registrar Vigilance of the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur but the said complaint has been hushed-up (jQk-nQk) by the High Court. He also stated that the Rajasthan Judiciary has become centre of criminals. The cases of corruptions are being disposed of by the High Court by initiating criminal contempt proceedings. He has also referred to certain activities of political leaders and police officers. They are not relevant in the present context, as such, it is not necessary to state all those allegations. It also appears that some proceedings were initiated against the contemner respondent, which included attachment of the machinery etc. lying on the plot for the recovery of the amount of loan due against him at the instance of Financial Institutions. This led him to make complaints against all concern. He has referred to various criminal cases. In para 13, he has stated that the Presiding Officer and the Reader of the Civil Court abusing the judicial proceedings, has passed the exparte decree in the eviction suit. He made a complaint to the District Judge for criminal judicial enquiry against the Civil Judge but the District Judge disposed-of the same. He has also made certain complaints against the lawyers. In para 14, he has referred-to the list of cases as given in Schedules 1 and 2. It is stressed that inspite of civil and criminal proceedings, he has not been able to get the justice either from the Rajasthan High Court or the subordinate courts. It is averred that the reason for not getting justice is criminalisation in Judiciary on large scale. He has also stated that because of the fundamental defects in the judicial system, he has been deprived of his livelihood. He has requested the Honble Chief Minister and Honble Law Minister, Govt. of Rajasthan to enquire into the pending cases in the Rajasthan High Court and the Subordinate Courts as to how the powers vested in the courts have been misused. He has requested the Honble Chief Minister and Honble Law Minister, Govt. of Rajasthan to enquire into the pending cases in the Rajasthan High Court and the Subordinate Courts as to how the powers vested in the courts have been misused. He has prayed that through the Ministry of Law, the Rajasthan High Court should be asked to submit the annual reports of their working being the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly containing the information as to in how many cases, injunctions have been granted, for what time and at whose instance. The Rajasthan High Court should also be directed to submit a monthly report as are being submitted by the District Courts to be placed before the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly. (5). The Rajasthan High Court should also be directed to submit a monthly report as are being submitted by the District Courts to be placed before the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly. (5). For ready reference, the contents of paras 9, 12, 13, 14, 15(b), 15(c) and the relief clause are extracted as follows: ``¼9½ ;g fd lrr~ dUVsEiVuj vizkFkhZ Øe 1] dks xSj dkuwuh ykHk nsrs gq, bu[yk; okn esa Hkonh; ds fo:) fdjk;k fu/kkZj.k fd;k x;k ftlds fo:) Hkonh; us ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; esa vihy dh ftlesa QkStnkjh dUVsEiV djrs gq, U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;ksa dk nq:i;ksx djds vizkFkhZ Øe 1 }kjk vihy [kkfjt djokbZ xbZ] vknsk fnukad 16-7-91 izdj.k la[;k fofo/k vihy nhokuh 368@1991 ftlds fo:) Hkonh; }kjk 25-1-89 dk Vh-vkbZ-Hkonh; ds i{k esa ikfjr djus okys eaqflQ nf{k.k U;k;ky; esa QkStnkjh dUVsEiV dh dk;Zokgh pyk;h xbZ ijUrq mls ihBklhu vf/kdkjh }kjk vknsk fnukad 28-1-97 }kjk jQk nQk fd;k x;k rFkk ftlds lEcU/k Hkonh; }kjk jftLVªkj fothysl mPp U;k;ky; t;iqj dks Hkonh; lwfpr fd;k x;k o jftLVªkj foftysal }kjk Hkonh; ls kiFk i= eaxokdj bl ekeys dk fuiVkjk djus ds cgkus ¼i= Øekad vfr@jft-@lrdrkZ@228@97@1406 fnukad 4-12-97½ vijkf/k;ksa dk dsUnz cu xbZ jktLFkku dh U;k;ikfydk }kjk gkbZ dksVZ esa gqos Hkz"Vkpkj tfur QkStnkjh dUVsEiV dks vktdy jQk nQk fd;k tk jgk gSA ¼12½ ;g fd mijksDr of.kZr Vh-vkbZ-fnukad 25-1-89] Vh-vkbZ-fnukad 26-10-90] ekhu fjyht vknsk fnukad 8-2-93] fuxjkuh vknsk fnukad 25-2-94] o fuxjkuh vknsk fnukad 17-12-94] Hkonh; ds i{k esa gksus ds ckotwn] Hkonh; iqfyl ds ikl vizkFkhZ Øe 1 ds lrr O;o/kku o xq.MkxnhZ dh fkdk;rs yxkrkj ntZ djrs jgus ds ckotwn o iqfyl@vnkyr esa 467 vkbZ-ih-lh-bR;kfn dh dk;Zokgh vizkFkhZ Øe 4 ds fo:) yfEcr jgus ds ckotwn Hkonh; dk dkj[kkuk iqfyl dh kg ij eqyftekuksa dh lrr xq.MkxnhZ] vijkf/kd xfrfof/k;ksa o vijkf/kd "kM+;a=ksa dh otg ls Bi gks x;k o dkj[kkus dh ekhus rFkk leku Hkonh; ls xSj dkuwuh fNu fy;k x;k rFkk <sj lkjh vnkyrh o iqfyl dk;Zokfg;k Hkonh; ds dqN Hkh dke uk vk ldh ;g ns[kdj Hkonh; cgqr nq[kh gqvk rFkk 1993 Qjojh ds ckn ls Hkonh; dks vius eqdnesa Lo;a gh yM+us dk QSlyk etcwju blfy, djuk iM+k D;ksafd vfHkHkk"kd iqfyl fd feyh Hkxr ls gks jgh eqyfteksa dh xq.MkxnhZ o vU; vijk/kksa ls Hkonh; dks mlds ifjokj dks o mlds dkj[kkus dks ugha cpk ik jgs Fks o bl rjg vkFkksfjVh vkWQ ykW dks rksvkj gksus ns jgs FksA U;k; ikfydk ls Hkonh; dks dksbZ U;k; ugha fnyok ik jgs Fks cfYd myVk lrr dUVsEiVuj o vijkf/k;ksa dks ykHk feyrk gqvk fufjfyIV Hkko ls ns[k jgs FksA rFkk izHkkokkyh dkuwuh dk;Zokfg;k ugha pyk jgs Fks o Hkonh; dh vkthfodk dh lqj{kk dks dkuwuu visf{kr xEHkhjrk ls ugha ys jgs FksA vr% Hkonh; }kjk eqdnesa vius gkFk esa ysdj vijkf/k;ksa ls Hkonh; dks] mlds ifjokj dks o mlds O;olk; dks dkuwuu visf{kr jkgr fnyokus ds mn~ns; ls ¼d½ QkStnkjh izdj.k la[;k 1] 2] 4] 5] 6] 7] 8] 9 o QkStnkjh dUVsEiV ¼QSlyk fnukad 28-1-97½ fd U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;ka Qjojh 1993 ds ckn lafLFkr dh xbZ tks vkt Hkh yfEcr gSA ¼[k½ lkE;k ds fl)kUrksa ij bDohVscy jsesMh izkIr djus ds fy, Hkonh; ds O;olk; dks ?kkrd gkuh ls cpkus ds mn~ns; ls Hkonh; }kjk ?kks"k.kk dk ,d okn nhokuh izdj.k la[;k 5 vizkFkhZ Øe 7 ds fo:) Hkh izkFkhZ }kjk 1994 esa izLrqr fd;k x;kA rFkk ¼x½ vizkFkhZx.k 1 yxk;r 6 ds nq"d`R;ksa@vid`R;ksa ds dkj.k Hkonh; dk dkj[kkuk cUn gks x;k o fNu x;k ftlds QyLo:i izkFkhZ dh cktkj esa dkQh nsunkfj;ka c<+ xbZ o ekhus fey tkus ds ckn Hkh fcuk /ku dh O;oLFkk ds dkj[kkuk pykuk vlEHko gksus ds e/;utj vizkFkhZx.k 1 yxk;r 6 ds fo:) {kfriwfrZ@izfrdj dk ,d okn Hkh Hkonh; }kjk tuojh] 1996 esa yxk;k x;k ftlesa dkj[kkuk rqjUr pkyw djus ds mn~ns; ls varfje jkgrksa dh izkFkZuk Hkh dh xbZ ;g okn Hkonh; ds vkfFkZd dfBukbZ;ksa ds dkj.k vknsk 33 fu;e 2 O;-iz-la-ds vUrxZr yxk;k x;kA vkMZj 33 :y 2 lhihlh dk ;g izkFkZuk i= fnukad 11-9-98 dks [kkfjt fd;k x;k ftlds lEcU/k esa izkFkhZ }kjk Hkkjrh; lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 21 ds vUrxZr fjV ;kfpdk dh dk;Zokgh pykbZ tk jgh gSA ¼13½ ;g fd bl chp vizkFkhZ Øe 1 mlds vfHkHkk"kd] eqaflQ nf{k.k U;k;ky; ds ihBklhu vf/kdkjh o jhMj }kjk U;kf;d dk;Zokgh dk nq:i;ksx djrs gq, Hkonh; dks bu[yk; okn esa ,Dl ikVhZ djkj fn;k x;k gS ftlds lEcU/k esa izkFkhZ us ftyk U;k;k/khk dks vijkf/kd U;kf;d tkap djokus gsrq fkdk;r Hkh dhA ijUrq bls Hkh jQk nQk fd;k tk jgk gSA rFkk mlh bu[yk; okn esa vihy dh dk;Zokgh nhokuh izdj.k la[;k 18 o 20 esa fely rych ds vknskksa ds tkjh gksus ds ckotwn ewy i=koyh xSj dkuwuu jksd dj bu[;ky okn esa vknsk djok fn;s ftlds lEcU/k esa Hkonh; us nhokuh vihy izdj.k la[;k 9 Hkh pykbZ ijUrq bu lc ds ckotwn Hkonh; dks lwfpr fd;s fcuk o fnukad 25-1-89 rFkk 26-10-90 ds Vh-vkbZ-ds ckotwn Hkonh; ds dkj[kkus ds rkys rksMs x;s o dkj[kkus esa iM+s lkeku ij vizkf/kd "kM+;a= }kjk QkStnkjh dUVsEiV djrs gqos xSj dkuwuu dCtk fd;k x;kA bu lcds lEcU/k esa Hkonh; }kjk jftLVªkj fothysal t;iqj ds ikl fkdk;r] ckj dkWmafly] tks/kiqj esa izksQsluy feld.MDV ds fy, ,MoksdsV ,DV dh /kkjk 33 ds vUrxZr vizkFkhZ Øe 1 ds vfHkHkk"kdx.k dks Mhckj djokus dh dk;Zokgh rFkk nhokuh izdj.k la[;k 3] 11] 13] 14] 21] 22 dh dk;Zokfg;ka pyk;h tk jgh gSA ekU;oj ;gka ;g mYys[k izklafxd gS fd izkFkhZ us Lo;a vizkFkhZ Øe 1] ds vfHkHkk"kdx.k o bu[yk; okn ls lEcaf/kr fofHkUu ihBklhu vf/kdkfj;ksa dks fiNys 4 lkyksa ¼1993 ls 1997½ esa vnkyrh dk;Zokfg;kW ds nkSjku gh ckr djrs o fVIif.k;ka djrs lquk gS ftudk lnSo gh vkk; jgk gS fd mijksDr 9 of.kZr vijkf/kd dUVsEiV djds mPp U;k;ky; ls fdjk;k fu/kkZj.k vihy esa izkIr fd;k x;k dkuwuu fujLrh; vknsk fnukad 16-7-91 dks mPp U;k;ky; dh xfjek ds e/; utj fdlh rjg lqjf{kr j[kk tkosa o blh eakk ds vuqØe esa bu[yk; okn esa Hkonh; dks oS/k fgrksa dks uqdkku igqapkus ds izfr U;kf;d leqnk; ¼csap o ckj½ dkuwuu vkifrtud :i ls vfr mRlkfgr o laosnukhy jgk gSaA ¼14½ ;g fd layXu lwph Øe 1 o 2 ¼nhokuh o QkStnkjh izdj.k½ dh U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;ka ds ckotwn jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; o blds v/khuLFk U;k;ky; ls Hkonh; dks vHkh rd dksbZ U;k; o jkgr ugha fey ikbZ gS D;ksafd jktLFkku dh U;kf;d O;oLFkk dk O;kid Lrj ij vijkf/kdj.k gksus ls buesa ?kksj vU;k; O;kIr gks x;k gS ftlds izHkkokkyh funku gsrq Hkonh; us vuqrks"kksa esa vkosnu Hkh fd;k gSA ijUrq jktLFkku dh U;kf;d O;oLFkk esa bu cqfu;knh [kkfe;ksa ds iSnk gks tkus ds dkj.k Hkonh; o mlds ifjokj vkthfodk ls oafpr gS] ifjokjtuksa dh chekfj;ksa dk leqfpr bykt ugha gks ikrk gS ftlds dkj.k ifjokjtuksa dks LFkk;h kkjhfjd {kfr;k Hkh gqbZ gS o gks jgh gSA cPpksa dh i<+kbZ <ax ls ugha gks ikrh gS ftlls cPpksa dk Hkfo"; fcxM+k gSa o fcxM+ jgk gS] ?kksj vkfFkZd vHkkoksa esa thuk iM+ jgk gS] lekt o cktkj esa ?kksj vieku o vuknj dh ftUnxh Hkonh; o mlds ifjokj dks thuh iM+ jgh gSaA o Hkonh; rFkk mlds ifjokj dk thuk nqHkZj gks x;k gSA ¼15½¼ch½ dkuwu cuus ds 27 lky ckn Hkh vnkyrksa ds ihBklhu vf/kdkjhx.k vnkyrh voekuuk vf/kfu;e 1971 dh /kkjk 2] 15 o 16 ds {kS=kf/kdkjksa dks /kkj.k djus ds fy, drbZ gh rS;kj ugha gS tks fd fof/ktud kfDr ls U;k; ikfydk dh lhuktksjh gS ftlds dkj.k fuxjkuh o QkStnkjh dUVsEiV dh dk;Zokfg;k dk QdZ lekIr gks x;k gSA rFkk jktLFkku dh turk dks QkStnkjh dUVsEIV dh lLrh o vius gh {kS= esa lyx U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;ksa dh ctk; vdkj.k egaxh o dsoy t;iqj] tks/kiqj esa miyC/k mPp U;k;ky; dh fuxjkuh dh U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;ka esa brus cM+s iSekus ij ?klhVk tk jgk gSA ;g lc dqN u dsoy jktLFkku esa vjktdrk dk ,d [kqye[kqyk o O;kid Lrj dk mnkgj.k gS cfYd blds QyLo:i jktLFkku U;k;ikfydk ds ihBklhu vf/kdkjhx.k vijkf/k;ksa ds Vksyh ds :i esa LFkkifr gksdj jg x;s gSA rFkk bl vU;k; dks odhy leqnk; viuh Qhl o dehku dh ykyp esa gok ns jgs gSA ¼15½¼lh½ Hkonh; }kjk 1908 esa dksVk lalnh; {kS= ls yksdlHkk dk pquko yM+s tkus ds nkSjku dh vof/k dks NksM+dj fiNys 6 lkyksa esa tc ls Hkonh; vius yxHkx 40 U;kf;d izdj.k Lo;a gh yM+ jgk gS rc ls Hkonh; us bl vof/k esa dHkh Hkh vnkyrksa esa LFkxu dk vkosnu ugha fd;k ijUrq odhyksa ds ekxus ek= ij gh ftl rjg vnkyrs LFkxuksa ds ek/;e ls jktLFkku ds vf/kdkak eqdneksa dks vdkj.k yEck [ksprh gS mlls u dsoy eqdneksa ds fuLrkj.k esa 10 lky ls Hkh vf/kd dk le; yx tkrk gS cfYd dh vnkyrksa esa yfEcr eqdneksa dk <sj Hkh yx jgk gSA ;g jktLFkku dh turk ds lkFk fuckZ/k :i ls py jgh U;kf;d leqnk; cSap o ckWj dh ,slh [kqye[kqyk o O;kid Lrj dh nknkfxjh gS tks fd turk dks U;k; fnyokus dk nkok djus okys] jktuhfr ls lEcfU/kr izR;sd O;fDr ds fy, ,d pqukSrh dk fo"k; gksuk pkfg,A vr% Jheku~ ls uez fuosnu gS fd & ¼1½ ,l Mh ,e lhVh dksVk ds fjyth vknsk fnukad 8-2-93 izdj.k la[;k 4@93 dh vuqikyuk djokbZ tkdj Hkonh; dks mlds dkj[kkus dh ekhus o vU; lkeku fnyok;k tkos rkfd Hkonh; vius o ifjokj dh vkthfodk dks iqu% pkyw dj ldsA ¼2½ fof/k ea=ky; }kjk ,d tkap vk;ksx dh fu;qfDr dh tkos tks fd fiNys ikap nl lkyksa esa jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; esa yxs fuxjkuh bR;kfn ds eqdneksa dh bl n`f"V ls tkap djs fd fdrus izdj.kksa esa fuxjkuh dh ctk; {kS=kf/kdkj ds de@vf/kd@xyr iz;ksx ds dkj.k QkStnkjh dUVsEIV dh dk;Zokfg;ka yxuh pkfg, Fkh tks fd ugha yxkbZ xbZA ;kfu dh jktLFkku ds yksxks dks tks lLrk o lqyHk U;k; feyuk pkfg, og U;kf;d leqnk; cSap o ckj }kjk ugha feyus fn;k x;kA ¼3½ fof/k ea=ky; ds ek/;e ls jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; }kjk jktLFkku fo/kku lHkk esa okf"kZd fjiksVZ izLrqr djokbZ tkos ftlesa ;g fooj.k gks fd jktLFkku esa vnkyrksa esa LFkxu fdrus eqdneksa esa o fdrus le; ds fy, o fdl i{kdkj ds vkosnu ij fn;s x;sA jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; bl okf"kZd fjiksVZ dks ftyk U;k;ky;ksa ls izkIr ,slh gh ekfld fjiksVZ ds vk/kkj ij rS;kj djok ldrk gSA ftldh ijEijk dk pyok;k tkuk yksd U;k; ds fgr esa dkuwuu vfuok;Z o okaNuh; gSA** (6). The respondent has not disputed the fact of writing and sending representation under reference. He has submitted reply. It is averred that he has not been made to understand as to how the contents of paragraphs, referred in order dt. 22.3.2000, constitute a criminal contempt. It is also stated that he does not see anything wrong in making representation dated 23.12.1998 to the Chief Minister and Law Minister, against the functioning of the Judiciary. It is emphasized that in addition to Judiciary, there are two important organs of the State namely Executive and the Legislature. He has also stated that now a days, the Press is also considered as a fourth important pillar of the democracy. It is submitted that the statement of fact in the representation is nothing but an expression of a victim person. He has also taken the plea that the statement made in the representation has not been published. He has further stated that the contents of representation under reference is a privileged communication between him and the Honble Chief Minister and the Honble Law Minister of Govt. of Rajasthan. On the basis of such privileged communication, no contempt proceedings can be initiated. It is submitted in alternate that he may be given the substance of accusation. It is also submitted that in absence of supply of copy of substance of accusation, entire proceedings are illegal. Lastly, it is submitted that he has been put to unbearable burden by calling from Bhopal and Kota under an illegal order. (7). The contemner respondent was given the copy of his representation and the relevant documents by order dated 7.4.99. He was also permitted to inspect the file. Thereafter, he did not appear before this court. His presence could be secured only by bailable warrant. At no stage, he asked for the supply of the substance of accusations. On the contrary on 23.03.2000, when the court asked him if he needs assistance of some lawyer, he not only refused to accept but made a statement that he is an expert on the Law of Contempt. It appears that he feels that by prolonging the contempt petition, he can claim to be an expert in the Law of Contempt. On the contrary on 23.03.2000, when the court asked him if he needs assistance of some lawyer, he not only refused to accept but made a statement that he is an expert on the Law of Contempt. It appears that he feels that by prolonging the contempt petition, he can claim to be an expert in the Law of Contempt. Be that as it may, the accusations as contained in the paras 9, 12, 13, 14, 15(b) and the relief clause as contained in the letter dated 23.12.98 were read over to him. He read them with the court and marked relevant portion in the copy of representation under reference with him. Thus, he is aware of the offending paras. Thus, there is no substance in the plea that copy of substance of accusation has not been given to him. (8). The criminal contempt defined in Section 2 (c) of the Act reads as follows: ``2. Definitions:-In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:- (a) xxxxx (b) xxxxx (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 (ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or (iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner; (9). We have carefully considered the relevant portions extracted above from the representation under reference. The law with respect to the criminal contempt has been well settled by the various decisions of the Apex Court. Reference may be made to Thakur Jugal Kishore Sinha vs. Sitamarhi Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Anr. (1); Mohd. Zahir Khan vs. Vijai Singh (2); and L.D. Jaikwal vs. State of U.P. (3); Ajay Kumar Pandeys Case (4); Harijani Singhs Case (5); and S. Mulgaokars Case (6). Suffice it to quote statement of law as enunciated in one of the case namely in Sanjiv Datta, Res case (7) as follows: ``Abuses, attribution of motives, vituperative terrorism and defiance are no methods to cor-rect the errors of the courts. Suffice it to quote statement of law as enunciated in one of the case namely in Sanjiv Datta, Res case (7) as follows: ``Abuses, attribution of motives, vituperative terrorism and defiance are no methods to cor-rect the errors of the courts. In the discharge of their functions the courts have to be allowed to operate freely and fearlessly but for which impartial adjudication will be an impossibility. Ours is a Constitutional government based on the rule of law. The Constitution entrusts the task of interpreting and administering the law to the judiciary whose view on the subject is made legally final and binding on all till it is changed by a higher court or by a permissible legislative measure. Those living and functioning under the Constitution have to accept and submit to this obligation of respecting the constitutional authority of the courts. Under a Constitutional government, such final authority has to vest in some institution. Otherwise, there will be a chaos. The courts verdict has to be respected not necessarily by the authority of its reason but always by reason of its authority. Any conduct designed to or suggestive of challenging this crucial balance of power devised by the Constitution is an attempt to subvert the rule of law and an invitation to anarchy. The contemner, for reasons which can only be attributed to his misconception of his role and over-zealousness to assert himself and his side of the matter intentionally overstepped his limits and conveniently ignored the above legal position and abrogated to himself, in substance, the role of a Judge in his own cause. He has thus in effect not only challenged the jurisdiction of the Court to discharge its functions but also its authority to do so. (10). We have carefully read the representation under reference. Contemner has made baseless, malicious and scandalous allegations against the Judiciary in the State of Rajasthan. He has made scurrilous attack on Judges. The allegations are contemptuous and calculated to bring the subordinate courts and the High Court in the State of Rajasthan in disrepute. He has cast a reflection on the honesty and integrity of all the courts in the State of Rajasthan including the High Court. Whenever his matter is decided by the courts on administrative side or judicial side, he describes it as hushed-up (jQk nQk) imputing motives. He has described the Judges as `gang of criminals. He has cast a reflection on the honesty and integrity of all the courts in the State of Rajasthan including the High Court. Whenever his matter is decided by the courts on administrative side or judicial side, he describes it as hushed-up (jQk nQk) imputing motives. He has described the Judges as `gang of criminals. It clearly amounts to scandalising the courts, which constitutes an offence of ``criminal contempt as defined u/s 2(c) of the Act. We, therefore, hold the respondent contemner Hemraj guilty of committing offence of criminal contempt, punishable u/s 12 of the Act. (11). We have also heard the respondent contemner on the point of sentence. There is no repentence on the part of the respondent contemner. On the contrary, he persists and justifies his conduct as legal and valid and shows no inclination to give up the path, he has adopted. He, by his own conduct, has disabled us from showing any mercy to him in the matter of imposing sentence. Considering all facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations, we are satisfied that the contempt is of such nature which tends to substantially interfere with the course of justice. In such circumstances, the court will not shirk from its duty to uphold the majesty of law in the public interest. It would be a traversity of justice, if the court were to allow a person guilty of gross contempt of court, to go un-punished. (12). Consequently, we hold the respondent Hem Raj Jain guilty of criminal contempt punishable u/s 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and considering all facts and circumstances of the case, sentence him to two months simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-(Rs. one thousand). In default of payment, he will further undergo 15 days simple imprisonment.