Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: Chandan Mitra and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Supreme Court of India Decided Mar 27, 1997
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/670766

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Supreme Court of India
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Suo Motu Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 57 of 1996
Subject
Contempt of Court

Case Summary

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

- - Shri Ram Jethmalani, Senior Counsel for the contemners, assures us on behalf of the contemners as well as on his own behalf, on behalf of Shri Arun Jaitley and the other learned counsel appearing with him that after deliberations with the contemners over a long duration, they are fully satisfied that both the ...

Key legal issue
Contempt of Court

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Chandan Mitra and anr.

Legal References

Reported In
1998(1)SCALE253a; (1998)8SCC554

Excerpt

- - shri ram jethmalani, senior counsel for the contemners, assures us on behalf of the contemners as well as on his own behalf, on behalf of shri arun jaitley and the other learned counsel appearing with him that after deliberations with the contemners over a long duration, they are fully satisfied that both the contemners understand the gravity of the act and are genuinely repentant for their conduct and that they are satisfied about the genuineness of their assurance to ensure avoidance of any such repetition in future.order1.the contemners are present in person. they have tendered an unqualified apology in writing making it clear through their counsel, shri ram jethmalani that neither of them pleads any justification. the contemners, who are present in person, reiterate their unqualified apology and assure us that there would be no repetition of any such act in future by any of them. shri ram jethmalani, senior counsel for the contemners, assures us on behalf of the contemners as well as on his own behalf, on behalf of shri arun jaitley and the other learned counsel appearing with him that after deliberations with the contemners over a long duration, they are fully satisfied that both the contemners understand the gravity of the act and are genuinely repentant for their conduct and that they are satisfied about the genuineness of their assurance to ensure avoidance of any such repetition in future. we have administered a stern warning to the contemners. in these circumstances, we are inclined to the view that the unqualified apology tendered by the contemners without making even an attempt to plead any justification from the outset should be accepted. accordingly, we accept their unqualified apology coupled with the assurance as aforesaid. the notice is discharged.

Full Judgment

ORDER

1.The contemners are present in person. They have tendered an unqualified apology in writing making it clear through their counsel, Shri Ram Jethmalani that neither of them pleads any justification. The contemners, who are present in person, reiterate their unqualified apology and assure us that there would be no repetition of any such act in future by any of them. Shri Ram Jethmalani, Senior Counsel for the contemners, assures us on behalf of the contemners as well as on his own behalf, on behalf of Shri Arun Jaitley and the other learned counsel appearing with him that after deliberations with the contemners over a long duration, they are fully satisfied that both the contemners understand the gravity of the act and are genuinely repentant for their conduct and that they are satisfied about the genuineness of their assurance to ensure avoidance of any such repetition in future. We have administered a stern warning to the contemners. In these circumstances, we are inclined to the view that the unqualified apology tendered by the contemners without making even an attempt to plead any justification from the outset should be accepted. Accordingly, we accept their unqualified apology coupled with the assurance as aforesaid. The notice is discharged.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial