IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
\nORIGINAL JURISDICTION
\nINTERIM APPLICATION NOS. 48502, 48483, 48482 & 48484 OF 2020
\nIN
\nSUO MOTU CONTEMPT PETITION(CRIMINAL)NO. 2 OF 2019
\nRE : VIJAY KURLE & ORS. Contemnor (s)
\nVERSUS
\nRespondent(s)
\nO R D E R
\nInterim Application No.48502 of 2020
\nThis is an application filed by Contemnor No.3-Nilesh Ojha for
\nrecusal of one of (Deepak Gupta, J.). The only ground taken is that
\nthe Bench is in a hurry to decide the matter. The main Contempt
\nPetition was heard at length and disposed of on 27.04.2020. After
\nthe judgment was pronounced, the case was fixed on 01.05.2020 for
\nhearing the contemnors on sentence. The contemnors filed
\napplications for recall of the judgment and, therefore, the matter
\nwas listed today. One of us (Deepak Gupta, J.) is to demit office
\non 06.05.2020 and, therefore, the matter had to be heard and we see
\nno ground for one of us to recuse. The application is accordingly
\nrejected.
\nInterim Application No. 48483 of 2020
\nThis is an application for adjournment. We find no reason to
\nadjourn the matter. The application is rejected.
\n-2-
\nInterim Application Nos. 48480, 48482 & 48484 of 2020
\nAt the outset we may point out that we have heard Mr. Partha
\nSarkar, appearing for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Nilesh Ojha,
\nRespondent No.3 in person in detail for more than half-an-hour. As
\nfar as Contemnor No.2-Rashid Khan Pathan is concerned, none
\nappeared for him on the last occasion. Today, Mr. Ishwari Lal S.
\nAggarwal and Mr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay, advocates put appearance for
\nhim. It would be pertinent to point out that the registry had
\nreceived a WhatsApp message from Mr. Ishwari Lal S. Aggarwal, that
\naround 100 advocates would appear for Respondent No.2, and he
\nwanted to know the limit for Video Conferencing. Later, he sent a
\nlist of 11 advocates appearing for Respondent No.2. Proper Video
\nConferencing communication was established with Mr. Ishwari Lal S.
\nAggarwal but he refused to argue the matter on merits and stated
\nthat the matter would be argued by Mr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay. Proper
\nVideo Conferencing communication could not established with Mr.
\nGhanshyam Upadhyay though he was visible, he was not audible.
\nTherefore, communication was established with him through WhatsApp
\nand he stated that there was no urgency in the matter and it should
\nbe listed after the lockdown over the COVID-19 pandemic is lifted.
\nIt is obvious that Contemnor No.2 in one way or the other is trying
\nto delay the matter.
\n-3-
\nThese three applications have been filed by all the three
\ncontemnors seeking recall of the judgment dated 27.04.2020. The
\nmain ground taken is that our judgment is contrary to the judgment
\nrendered in Bal Thackrey vs. Harish Pimpalkhute and Others1 and
\nsome other judgments. It is urged that the judgment is per
\nincuriam and not as per the law laid down by this Court. It is
\nalso urged that notice could not have been issued by the Bench
\ncomprising of Hon. R.F. Nariman and Vineet Saran, JJ., and the
\nmatter should have been first dealt with by the Chief Justice on
\nthe administrative side. We have in our judgment dealt with all
\nthese contentions. A long hearing was given to the contemnors and
\nafter hearing them the judgment was reserved on 02.03.2020. Till
\n27.04.2020 when the judgment was pronounced no grievance was raised
\nthat the contemnors have not been given a proper hearing. We find
\nthat all the grounds raised in the three recall applications are
\nvirtually identical and in all the applications correctness of our
\njudgment is questioned on many grounds. No recall application can
\nlie on these grounds and the proper remedy for the contemnors is to
\nfile a review petition, if so advised. We, therefore, reject all
\nthe three recall applications as being not maintainable without
\nexpressing any opinion on the grounds raised therein. The
\ncontemnors if so advised, can file review petition in accordance
\nwith law.
\nMr. Nilesh Ojha prayed that he may be granted liberty to file
\na writ petition. In our view no writ petition can lie to challenge
\nour judgment and, therefore, this prayer is rejected.
\n1 (2005) 1 SCC 254
\n-4-
\nAs far as the application for recall is concerned, we have
\nheard detailed arguments by Contemnor Nos. 1 and 3 and the
\napplication of Contemnor No.2 is virtually identical. We are
\ntherefore dismissing of all the three applications.
\nSentence
\nThereafter the contemnors through their counsel were asked to
\nargue on sentence. All of them were not willing to argue on
\nsentence on the ground that according to them our judgment was per
\nincuriam and they had a right to challenge the same.
\nThere is not an iota of remorse or any semblance of apology on
\nbehalf of the contemnors. Since they have not argued on sentence,
\nwe have to decide the sentence without assistance of the
\ncontemnors. In view of the scurrilous and scandalous allegations
\nlevelled against the judges of this Court and no remorse being
\nshown by any of the contemnors we are of the considered view that
\nthey cannot be let off leniently. We have also held in our
\njudgment that the complaints were sent by the contemnors with a
\nview to intimidate the Judges who were yet to hear Shri Nedumpara
\non the question of punishment, so that no action against Shri
\nNedumpara is taken. Therefore, it is obvious that this is a
\nconcerted effort to virtually hold the Judiciary to ransom.
\n-5-
\nWe, therefore, sentence all the three contemnors namely Vijay
\nKurle, Nilesh Ojha and Rashid Khan Pathan, to undergo simple
\nimprisonment for a period of 3 months each with a fine of Rs.
\n2000\/-. In default of payment of fine, each of the defaulting
\ncontemnors shall undergo further simple imprisonment for a period
\nof 15 days.
\nKeeping in view the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown
\nconditions we direct that this sentence shall come into force after
\n16 weeks from today when the contemnors should surrender before the
\nSecretary General of this Court to undergo the imprisonment.
\nOtherwise, warrants for their arrest shall be issued.
\nSuo Motu Contempt Petition (Criminal) No.2 of 2019 is disposed
\nof in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any, shall
\nstand disposed of.
\n\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026.J.
\n(DEEPAK GUPTA)
\n\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026J.
\n(ANIRUDDHA BOSE)
\nNEW DELHI
\nMAY 04, 2020
\n-6-
\nITEM NO.1 Virtual Court 3 SECTION XVII
\nS U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
\nRECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
\nSMC (Crl.) No(s). 2\/2019
\nRE : VIJAY KURLE & ORS. Petitioner(s)
\nVERSUS
\nRespondent(s)
\n([MR. SIDHARTH LUTHRA, SR. ADV.(AC) MOB. NO. 9810010966][FOR
\nHEARING THE CONTEMNORS ON THE ISSUE OF SENTENCE] )
\nDate : 04-05-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.
\nCORAM :
\nHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
\nHON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA BOSE
\nFor Petitioner(s)
\nBy Courts Motion, AOR
\nFor the appearing parties:
\nMr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr.Adv.(A.C.)
\nMr. Partha Sarkar,Adv.(for R.1)
\nMr. Vijay Kurle, (R.1)(In person)
\nMr. Ghanshyam Upadhyay,Adv.(for R.2)
\nMr. Ishwarilal S Aggarwal,Adv.
\nMr. Nilesh C Ojha, (R.3)(In person)
\nMr. Mobin Akhtar,Adv.
\nMr. Pritam Biswas,Adv.
\nMr. Nitin Saluja,Adv.
\nUPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
\nO R D E R
\nApplications for recall are rejected.
\nSuo Motu Contempt Petition is disposed of.
\n(SUMAN WADHWA) (DIPTI KHURANA)
\nAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
\nSigned order is placed on the file.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
There is not an iota of remorse or any semblance of apology on behalf of the contemnors. Since they have not argued on sentence, we have to decide the sentence without assistance of the contemnors. In view of the scurrilous and scandalous allegations levelled against the judges of this Court and no remorse being shown by any of the contemnors we are of the considered view that they cannot be let off leniently. We have also held in our judgment that the complaints were sent by the contemnors with a view to intimidate the Judges who were yet to hear Shri Nedumpara on the question of punishment, so that no action against Shri Nedumpara is taken. Therefore, it is obvious that this is a concerted effort to virtually hold the Judiciary to ransom.<\/p>\n