Augustine Toppo and ors. Vs. State of Bihar - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- constitution of india article 215: [m. karpaga vinayagam, cjm, .y.eqbal & amareshwar sahay, r.k. merathia, narendra nath tiwari, jj] contempt proceedings review powers of high court held, article 215 of the constitution vests the high court with all the powers of court of record including the power to punish for its contempt. this special jurisdiction is inherent in a court of record from the very nature of the court itself. the said special power is not subject to the procedural law either of the criminal procedure code or the contempt of courts act. the high court can deal with the matter summarily and can adopt its own procedure. however, if the high court initiates the proceeding as a court of record, principle of natural justice must be applied and the contemner should be given sufficient opportunity to know the accusation and to defend himself. in the instant case, the contemner was served with the notice to show cause. he was well aware of the accusation. he also admitted his guilt. in view thereof, contention of the contemner lawyer that he was not heard on merit of the contempt application and the impugned judgment of punishing petitioner in contempt of court is violative of principles of natural justice, is not tenable. article 215: contempt proceedings review of conviction held, it is the solemn duty of the bench and bar to maintain and uphold the majesty, authority and dignity of the courts for the sustenance and progress of democracy in our country particularly at the juncture when there are number of instances of outside attempt to disintegrate and destroy the democratic set up of our country. such conduct of a member of the bar brings the authority of the court and the administration of justice into disrespect, erodes and undermine the foundation of the judiciary by shaking faith and confidence of the people in the ability of the courts to deliver free and fair justice, it is a deliberate attempt to insult the high court and denigrate the authority and solemnity and court strongly deprecate such attempt made with biased attitude. such indiscriminate allegations against judges, who are the members of the bench, cannot be a ground for review of the impugned judgment. punishment of prohibiting appearance of contemner/lawyer before high court as well as courts under its jurisdiction is based on his repeated convictions for contempt in the past is not violative of article 19(g) of the constitution. no interference in exercise of review jurisdiction is warranted. hari shankar prasad, j.1. this appeal arises out of order dated 17.9.1998 passed in succession case no. 163 of 1995 by 5th additional judicial commissioner, ranchi whereby the case was dismissed in part for rs. 99,825/- deposited in double benefit deposit scheme dated 25.5.1988 in account no. l.f. no. 1534 in dank of india, khelari branch in the name of mariam toppo.2. the case of the appellants-applicants in brief is that mariam toppo and paloosh toppo were the husband and wife respectively and applicants are their grand sons and grand daughters. mariam toppo died on 3.4.1992 leaving behind her only son albis toppo who also died on 29.10.1994 leaving behind three sons augustin toppo, alexeus toppo and andrias toppo and they are applicants here. the applicant alexeus toppo died during the pendency of this case and his heirs were substituted as applicant no. 2 to 2 (o). further, poloosh toppo died since long when the father, of the applicants was minor and that the deceased mariam toppo and her son albis toppo had deposited rs. 50,000/- in fixed deposit in bank of india, khelari branch, ranchi having account no. 1564 on 21st may, 1988 and now it has become rs. 99,825/- after maturity and further the deceased marim toppo and albis toppo had deposited the money jointly in the saving bank account no. 2110 in the bank of india, khelari branch and the amount is now rs. 660/-. the applicants claim themselves to be the only legal heirs of mariam toppo and albis toppo and have prayed for issuing succession certificate for those amounts. on behalf of the applicants, some witnesses were examined and after taking evidence of the parties, the learned court below has allowed the prayer in part.3. heard learned counsel for the parties.4. during the course of hearing, learned counsels appearing for their respective parties argued that the judgment of the learned court below be set aside and case be remanded back for points raised in this appeal will be considered by the learned court below and a fresh order may be passed in accordance with law considering the points raised in the appeal.5. in that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 17.9.1998, passed in succession case no. 163 of 1995 is hereby set aside, so far as rejection order is concerned and the matter is remanded back to the learned court below for fresh consideration as the amount lying in bank to the tune of rs. 99,825/- will actually be paid to the legal heirs of the depositor and the learned court below after considering the facts, will pass order in accordance with law and will dispose of the matter within three months from the date of receipt of copy of his order.6. with this observation/directions, this misc. appeal is disposed of.