JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the contemnor Shankar Mahto. 2. Today the contemnor is present in court and a show cause has also been filed on his behalf. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the contemnor has submitted that the contemnor has tendered his unqualified and unconditional apology for the occurrence in question, in which allegedly the opposite party, the contemnor, used abusive language against the court in course of court proceeding when his prayer for bail was rejected and allegedly also threw a chappal at the lzlas. 4. From the letter of the District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur as well as from the show cause of the contemnor it appears that for the same very occurrence dated 27.9.2002, the opposite party was charged and tried for substantive offences under Sections 323/511, 353, 500 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo different punishments including simple imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In the show cause, it has been claimed that although the opposite party has preferred an appeal, he had to remain in custody for about ten months before being released on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party besides pressing for accepting the unqualified apology has further submitted that since the contemnor has already been tried and convicted for the occurrence in question, it would not be proper to try him and punish for the same occurrence again for inflicting him with further punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act. 6. Having considered all the relevant facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the contemnor has committed a serious act of contempt and in ordinary circumstances we would not have accepted the apology tendered on his behalf but in view of the fact that he has already suffered imprisonment for as much as 10 months for the substantive offences arising out of the same occurrence, we accept the apology tendered on behalf of the contemnor and let him off with a warning to be careful in future and not to repeat such act. 7. The proceeding is concluded.