Amar Singh vs Shri P. Dayanand 3 Cont/1266/2018 … on 13 December, 2018

chhatis garh HC

 

           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                        CONT No. 1276 of 2018

  1. Amar Singh S/o Samarulal Aged About 49 Years Village -
     Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
     District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  2. Khemchand S/o Kewal Singh Aged About 52 Years Village -
     Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
     District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  3. Sewa Singh S/o Shobha Singh Aged About 52 Years Village -
     Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
     District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  4. Gendlal S/o Patiram Aged About 62 Years Village - Kargikala,
     Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District :
     Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  5. Uday Singh S/o Shukhram Aged About 40 Years Village -
     Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
     District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  6. Rajaram S/o Heeralal Aged About 74 Years Village - Kargikala,
     Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District :
     Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  7. Shiv Singh S/o Ramadhin Aged About 62 Years Village - Kargikala,
     Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District :
     Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  8. Baliram S/o Ram Singh Aged About 62 Years Village - Kargikala,
     Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District :
     Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

  9. Makarsingh S/o Rambharos Aged About 63 Years Village -
     Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
     District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

10.   Chandrabhan Singh S/o Samaru Aged About 52 Years Village -
      Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
      District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

11.   Harinam Singh S/o Ram Singh Aged About 50 Years Village -
      Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
      District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

12.   Khilan Singh S/o Kalam Singh Aged About 69 Years Village -
                                      2

       Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
       District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

13.    Amar Singh S/o Phanasram Aged About 48 Years Village -
       Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
       District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

14.    Maha Singh S/o Phanasram Aged About 69 Years Village -
       Kargikala, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
       District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

15.    Parsuram S/o Kewal Singh Aged About 69 Years R/o Village -
       Magurda, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.,
       District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

16.    Buddhaman Singh S/o Chhotu Singh Aged About 42 Years R/o
       Village - Magurda, Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur
       Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

17.    Devlal S/o Manraj Aged About 65 Years R/o Village - Magurda,
       Tahsil And P.S. Marwahi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District :
       Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh                          ---- Petitioners

                                   Versus

       Shri P. Dayanand Collector Bilaspur, P.S. Citi Kotwali, Tahsil And
       District Bilaspur . (Contemnor), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                                           ---- Respondent/ Contemnor

For Petitioner : Mr. Badruddin Khan, Advocate.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 13/12/18 Heard.

1. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner herein, alleging non-compliance of this Court’s order dated 01.10.2018 passed in WPC No. 2695 of 2018.

2. After hearing learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to give one opportunity to the respondent/contemnor in the WPC No. 2695 of 2018 to ensure compliance of this Court’s order dated 01.10.2018.

3. The petitioner may also make additional representation along with the copy of this order within ten days from today before the respondent and, in turn, the respondent shall ensure the compliance of this Court’s order dated 01.10.2018 in its letter and spirit expeditiously.

4. With the aforesaid direction, the contempt case stands finally disposed of.

SD/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka

Mohd. Yakub Pasha And Another vs The Union Of India, Rep. By Its … on 11 October, 2018

Contempt of court, often referred to simply as “contempt“, is the offense in law of being disobedient to or disrespectful toward a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice and dignity of the court.[1][2] A very similar attitude towards a legislative body is termed contempt of Parliament or contempt of Congress.

There are broadly two categories of contempt: being disrespectful to legal authorities in the courtroom, or willfully failing to obey a court order.[3] Contempt proceedings are especially used to enforce equitable remedies, such as injunctions.[4] In some jurisdictions, the refusal to respond to subpoena, to testify, to fulfill the obligations of a juror, or to provide certain information can constitute contempt of the court.

When a court decides that an action constitutes contempt of court, it can issue a court order that in the context of a court trial or hearing declares a person or organization to have disobeyed or been disrespectful of the court‘s authority, called “found” or “held” in contempt. That is the judge‘s strongest power to impose sanctions for acts that disrupt the court’s normal process.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *