Rajkumar Mishra Vs. Shri Ashok Shende

Rajkumar Mishra vs Shri Ashok Shende

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Oct 29, 2012

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1040708

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1040708
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Oct 29, 2012
Subject: Contempt of Court

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Contempt of Court

Key legal issue: Contempt of Court

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajkumar Mishra

Respondent

Shri Ashok Shende

Excerpt

.....courts act, challenging the order dated 04/09/2012 passed in contempt petition no.1343/2012 by which an application filed by the appellant for initiating contempt proceedings against respondent, was dismissed. section 19 of the contempt of courts act, reads thus:- 19. appeals - (1) an appeals shall lie as of right from any order to decision of high court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt- (a) where the order or decision is that of a single judge, to a bench of not less than two judges of the court; (b) where the order or decision is that of a bench, to the supreme court: provided that where the order or decision is that of the court of the judicial commissioner in any union territory, such appeal shall lie to the supreme court. (2) pending any appeal. the appellate court may order that- (a) the execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended; (b) if the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail, and (c) the appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt. (3) where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfied the high court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the high court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by sub section (2).(4) an appeal under sub section (1) shall be filed- (a) in the case of an appeal to a bench of the high court, within thirty days. (b) in the case of an appeal to the supreme court, within sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against. the aforesaid provision specifically provides that against the order punishing the contemnor, an appeal can be filed, but when the contempt petition itself has been dismissed, no appeal has been provided. in view of the aforesaid, this appeal has found incompetent and is dismissed at admission stage. no order as to costs. (krishn kumar lahoti) (smt.vimla jain) judge judge manju writ appeal no.202 o”04. 09/2012 shri kishore shrivastava, senior advocate, shri.....

Full Judgment

Contempt Appeal No.02/2012 29/10/2012 Shri A.D.Mishra , Advocate for the appellant.

This contempt appeal is filed under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, challenging the order dated 04/09/2012 passed in Contempt Petition No.1343/2012 by which an application filed by the appellant for initiating contempt proceedings against respondent, was dismissed.

Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, reads thus:- 19.

Appeals - (1) An appeals shall lie as of right from any order to decision of High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt- (a) Where the order or decision is that of a single judge, to a Bench of not less than two Judges of the Court; (b) Where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court: Provided that where the order or decision is that of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.

(2) Pending any appeal.

The appellate court may order that- (a) The execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended; (b) If the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail, and (c) The appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt.

(3) Where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfied the High Court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the High Court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by sub section (2).(4) An appeal under sub section (1) shall be filed- (a) In the case of an appeal to a Bench of the High Court, within thirty days.

(b) In the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against.

The aforesaid provision specifically provides that against the order punishing the contemnor, an appeal can be filed, but when the contempt petition itself has been dismissed, no appeal has been provided.

In view of the aforesaid, this appeal has found incompetent and is dismissed at admission stage.

No order as to costs.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) JUDGE JUDGE manju Writ Appeal No.202 o”

04. 09/2012 Shri Kishore Shrivastava, Senior Advocate, Shri Ashok Agrawal, Shri Anuj Agrawal, and Kumari Chhoti Bai, Advocates for the appellant in various matteRs.Shri Vijay Pandey, Government Advocate, for the State.

Shri Mukesh Agrawal, Advocate for the Madhya Pradesh Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Limited.

At the request of the appellant hearing of the appeal is adjourned for 20th September, 2012.

Be listed for hearing along with analogous matter on the aforesaid date.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) JUDGE JUDGE manju

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Rajkumar Mishra vs Shri Ashok Shende Same Subject Contempt of Court