Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 2138 (ALL)

Shobha Devi v. Anil Dhingra, D. M.

2019-09-16

MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI

body2019
JUDGMENT : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The applicant is before this Court for a direction to initiate contempt proceeding against the opposite parties for wilful disobedience of the order dated 29.05.2019 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 18871 of 2019 (Shobha Devi vs. State of UP and others), which for ready reference is quoted as under:- "Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to implead District Level Security Committee as respondent no. 8. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Chief Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. /respondent nos. 1 to 6. This writ petition has been filed for issue of mandamus directing the respondents, particularly, Inspector General of Police, Meerut Zone, Meerut, respondent no. 3, to provide one more gunner for personal security of the petitioner and her family members. It is stated that the petitioner is a Member of Zila Panchayat, Meerut and several FIRs have been lodged against respondent no. 7 Vinay Tyagi as well as others. Since the petitioner apprehended imminent danger to her life, she was provided one gunner by the order dated 21.04.2012. Thereafter, on her application, second gunner was also provided to her by the order dated 02.03.2013. However, second gunner has been withdrawn by the order dated 25.03.2018. Although, danger to her life and property still exists. In the facts of the case, petitioner is permitted to file a fresh representation before the District Level Security Committee within a period of two weeks. In case, any such representation is filed, then District Level Security Committee shall examine it and pass suitable orders on it within a period of one month. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition is finally disposed of." 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite parties but the opposite parties have wilfully not complied with the order and, thus, have committed civil contempt liable for punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act,1971. 4. Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite parties to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 5. 4. Prima facie a case of contempt has been made out. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, one more opportunity is afforded to the opposite parties to comply with the aforesaid order of the Court within three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 5. The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope addressed to the opposite parties and another self-addressed stamped envelope to the office within one week from today. The office shall send a copy of this order along with the self-addressed stamped envelope of the applicant with a copy of contempt application to the opposite parties within one week, thereafter and keep a record thereof. The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ Court and intimate the applicant of the order through the self-addressed envelop within a week, thereafter. 6. With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the applicant to move a fresh application, if the order is not complied with by the opposite parties within the stipulated time as aforementioned.