Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3087 (DEL)

Court on Its Own Motion v. R. P. Dhyani

2014-11-27

G.ROHINI, RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

body2014
JUDGMENT : 1. Crl. Ref. No. 1/2008 was registered on receipt of a Reference dated 14th August, 2008 from the Court of Sh. S.C. Malik, Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. It was reported that a Hindi weekly newspaper titled “Shail Savera” (published by the contemnor Sh. R.P. Dhyani), distributed and circulated free of cost at Patiala House and Karkardooma Court Complexes in or about the last week of July, 2008, carried a headline on the front page “Jaipur Ke Jaalsaz Ke Jaal Mein Phansa Judge” and the contents thereunder levelled serious allegations of corruption against the referring Judge. It was further reported that the said newspaper in its subsequent issue of 11th to 16th August, 2008, again circulated free of cost in Karkardooma Court Complex, also carried headline on front page Ghooskhor Judge S.C. Malik Par Ab Tak Karyavahi Kyon Nahi?” with further derogatory, defamatory and contemptuous allegations thereunder against the referring Judge and against the judicial institution in general. Reference, besides against Sh. R.P. Dhyani, was also made against Dr. Prabha Pokhrial stated to be the Co-Editor of the said newspaper and Sh. Jhankar Priya Chaturvedi being the complainant of FIR No. 371/2007 of P.S. Gandhi Nagar, Delhi, with respect to which the aforesaid articles/news items pertained. 2. This Court vide order dated 10th September, 2008 prima facie found the allegations made in the aforesaid articles/news reports to be scandalous in nature and tending to undermine the respect and lower the authority of the Court and amounting to criminal contempt within the definition of Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1963. Accordingly, notice to show cause was issued. 3. Crl.C.Ref. No. 2/2008 was registered and initiated on receipt of another Reference dated 26th September, 2008 from Sh. S.C. Malik, Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi reporting that the contemnors in yet another issue dated 8th to 14th September, 2008 of the said newspaper, again widely circulated free of cost in the Karkardooma Court Complex and other District Courts at Delhi, had published on the front page a headline “Judge Ghooskhor -- Beta Chor, Karkardooma Ke Judge Wa Unke Bete Par Sangeen Aarop” making yet further derogatory, defamatory and contemptuous allegations thereunder against the referring Judge and his son in particular and against the judicial institution in general. 4. Subsequently, Dr. 4. Subsequently, Dr. Prabha Pokhrial was dropped, upon it being informed that she had no role to play in the publication. 5. Only the contemnor Sh. R.P. Dhyani filed a reply to the contempt petitions and vide order dated 12th January, 2009, evidence was ordered to be recorded in both the comtempt proceedings. 6. The comtept proceedings have unfortunately languished before the Registrar of this Court for recording of evidence for the last five years, with not a single witness being examined till date. When the matters listed before the Registrar on 27th August, 2014, the contemnor Sh. R.P. Dhyani informed that he wants to tender an unconditional apology for his actions. Accordingly, the matters were placed before us. 7. Today, both the contemnors i.e. Sh. R.P. Dhyani and Mr. Jhankar Priya Chaturvedi, identified by their respective Advocates have got recorded their statements on oath in the Court. 8. Mr. R.P. Dhyani has deposed that though he has been contesting these proceedings but has now realized his mistake and has tendered an unconditional apology to this Court as well as to Mr. S.C. Malik, Additional District-cum-Sessions Judge, Delhi presently posted as Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and has admitted that the allegations made by him in the aforesaid articles/news reports published in his newspaper were false and unfounded. He has further deposed that he has the highest regard for the Courts and their process and as also for Sh. S.C. Malik. He has also undertaken to, within ten days of today, publish on the first page of the newspaper “Shail Savera” as a headline, his apology to Sh. S.C. Malik and expressing his remorse therefor, after getting the draft thereof in Hindi language approved from the Registrar General of this Court. He has yet further undertaken to distribute copies of the newspaper containing the said apology in bold in all the District Courts and to all the Judges and to also leave fifty copies of the newspaper in the Bar Rooms of each of the District Courts. He has yet further undertaken to distribute copies of the newspaper containing the said apology in bold in all the District Courts and to all the Judges and to also leave fifty copies of the newspaper in the Bar Rooms of each of the District Courts. He has yet further undertaken not to in future do any act, deed or thing scandalizing or tending to scandalize or lowering or tending to lower the authority and dignity of any Court or prejudicing or interfering or tending to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceedings or otherwise interfering with the administration of justice in any manner. 9. The contemnor Sh. Jhankar Priya Chaturvedi in his statement has deposed that it has always been his stand in these proceedings that nothing of what was published in the impugned articles/news reports was attributable to him and that he had neither supplied any information to the publisher or editor or correspondent of the said newspaper nor had they made any inquiries from him before publishing the impugned articles/newspaper. He has further deposed that he as the complainant of FIR No. 391/2007 dated 30th November, 2007 of P.S. Gandhi Nagar, Delhi and to which the aforesaid articles/news reports pertained, never had and does not have any grievance against Sh. S.C. Malik, Additional District-cum-Sessions Judge, Delhi now presiding as the MACT, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and never accused him on any motives. He has also by way of abundant caution tendered unconditional aplogy to the Court as well as to Sh. S.C. Malik and has also endorsed the statement of Sh. R.P. Dhyani in entirety. 10. We have considered the matters in the light of the aforesaid developments. 11. The counsel for the State has with reference to Bal Kishan Giri v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2014) 7 SCC 280 argued that considering the seriousness of the allegations made in the impugned articles/news reports, the apology tendered today ought not to be accepted. 12. The contemnor Sh. R.P. Dhyani having appeared before us, yesterday as well as today and the statement of the two contemnors having been recorded before us today. 12. The contemnor Sh. R.P. Dhyani having appeared before us, yesterday as well as today and the statement of the two contemnors having been recorded before us today. We are of the opinion that the unconditional apology offered today though highly belated, is sincere and bona fide and in regretful acknowledgement of the actions and with a sense of genuine remorse and repentance and not as a calculated strategy to avoid punishment for an act which would tantamount to contempt of Court. It cannot be lost sight of that though the proceedings have unfortunately remained pending for the last nearly six years but with absolutely no progress. We are of the View that the grace of the Court in these circumstances, is in accepting the said apology, more so, when in the even of not accepting the apology, the proceedings will have to continue. We have also considered the matters from the aspect of the injury caused to the referring Judge who is but a part and parcel of this institution. We are informed that he is due to superannuate in about a year’s time. The acceptance of the apology and the undertaking given, in our view would also to a certain extent assuage the personal injury undoubtedly and unquestionably caused by the contemnors to the referring Judge and restore his honour amongst his fraternity. 13. We therefore accept the statements of both the contemnors and the unconditional apology tendered by both of them. We drop further proceedings against the contemnor Sh. Jhankar Priya Chaturvedi against whom, till date, nothing has emerged that the articles/news reports are attributable to him. However, as far as the contemnor Sh. R.P. Dhyani is concerned, we close these proceedings : (I) Issuing him a warning/caution that if he in future is found to have indulged in any similar acts, no lenience shall be shown to him. (II) On the condition that he within ten days of today, as also undertaken by him, publish in the newspaper “Shail Savera” on the first page, as a headline, an apology to this Court as well as to Sh. (II) On the condition that he within ten days of today, as also undertaken by him, publish in the newspaper “Shail Savera” on the first page, as a headline, an apology to this Court as well as to Sh. S.C. Malik, Additional District-cum-Sessions Judge and presently posted as MACT, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi with such contents as may be approved by the Registrar General of this Court and distributes the copies of the said publication containing an apology to all the Judges of all the District Court of Delhi and also distributes/circulates fifty copies of the said issue of the newspaper containing the apology in each of the Bar Rooms of each of the District Courts in Delhi. The contemnor Sh. R.P. Dhyani to, after preparing the text in Hindi language of the headline and the apology, have the same approved from the Registrar General of this Court, well before ten days of today. 14. The proceedings are closed.