Ravi Kumar Vs State of U P and 2 Others Criminal Misc Writ Petition No 15459 of 2022 Allahabad High Court 452895
Ravi Kumar Vs State of U P and 2 Others Criminal Misc Writ Petition No 15459 of 2022 Allahabad High Court 452895
AFR
Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 15459 of 2022
Petitioner :- Ravi Kumar
Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- In Person
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
“अ – उपर्युक्त र्युाचि का में उत्प्रेषणात्मक प्रकृचि का आदेश र्युा नि दश जारी कर े नि पक्षी सं० 2
2
ब- उपर्युक्त र्युाचि का में उत्प्रेषणात्मक प्रकृचि का आदेश र्युा नि दश जारी कर े हए नि पक्षी सं० 2 3
के नि रूद्ध नि भागीर्यु जाँ के आदेश पारिर कर े की कृपा करें।
स- उपर्युक्त र्युाचि का में थ्र्युों ए ं परिरस्थि23चि र्युों के आधार पर मा ीर्यु न्र्युार्युालर्यु उपर्युक्त प्रकृचि का
आदेश र्युा नि दश जारी कर े की कृपा करें।
द- उपर्युक्त र्युाचि का में र्युा ी के हक में सव्र्युर्यु आदेश र्युा नि दश जारी कर े की कृपा करें। "
“Without going into the merits of the applicants' case at this stage,
since the matter is a matrimonial dispute between applicant no. 5 and
opposite party no.2, who are husband and wife, it is desirable that the
parties be required to attempt a re-conciliation of their differences
with the assistance of Allahabad High Court Mediation and
Conciliation Centre.
Learned counsel for the applicants is in agreement with the aforesaid
course of action.
It is directed that petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs. 15,000/-
within three weeks from today with the Mediation Centre of which Rs.
12,000/- would be paid to the opposite party no. 2 for appearance
before the Mediation Centre.
Upon deposit aforesaid being made good, the Mediation Centre will
issue notice to both the parties fixing an early date for appearance
and further proceedings before the Centre.
The Mediation Centre will submit their report within two months from
the date parties are required to first appear before the Centre.
Thereafter the case shall be listed before appropriate Bench.
4
Till the next date of listing, the further proceedings in Case No. 191
of 2018, arising out of case crime no. 130 of 2016, under Sections
498A, 323, 506, 342, 354 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana,
District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending in the court of learned Civil
Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C., Gautam Budh Nagar shall remain stayed.”
Its the own admission by Mr. Ravi Kumar that the process of
mediation got aborted and no result has come out of the same.
8. Now coming back to the facts of the case, it is born out from
the order-sheet of Application u/s 482 No.13544 of 2018 that during
the period of last four years, since 20.4.2018 to till date, only on two
occasions i.e. in the year 2022, following orders were passed :
14. Now coming to the real crux of issue, relying over which the
petitioner has used all sorts of canards and unfounded insinuations
against the Presiding Officer.
15. Orders of two dates are relevant i.e. 11.8.2021 and 20.9.2021.
We have keenly perused both these orders. On 11.8.2021, it has been
mentioned that P.O. is on leave, accused were absent, let N.B.W. be
issued fixing 24.9.2021. However, later on, on the same date in the
presence of advocate of the accused he was directed to file certified
copy of the order-sheet of Hon’ble High Court by 20.9.2021 (though
later it was 24.9.2021), with the additional rider that accused shall
remain present in the court. It was clarified, if there is no stay order
from this Court, the accused have to appear on 20.9.2021 and apply
for bail. On the next date fixed i.e. 20.9.2021 the P.O. was on leave,
however, those documents were taken on record.
“8- र्युह की परिर ाद संख्र्युा 191/2018 शिश ा ी ब ाम रनि कमार आनिद में निद ांक
11/08/2021 को अनिBम नि र्यु निद ांक 24/9/2021 नि र्यु की गर्युी और निब ा पक्षकारों को
सूचि निकर्युे निब ा उचि क़ा ू ी प्रनिGर्युा अप ाए निब ा नि पक्षी संख्र्युा 02 03 की निमलीभग
(षड़र्युंत्र) के ल े परिर ाद संख्र्युा 191/2018 शिश ा ी ब ाम रनि कमार आनिद की ऑर्डरशीट में
जालसाजी करके दी0 24/09/21 की जगह दी0 01/09/2021 नि र्यु कर निदर्युा गर्युी. जो निक
का ू का 2पष्ट रूप से उल्लंघ निकर्युा गर्युा है जिजससे प्रा3V अन्र्यु के नि रुद्ध धोखे से 82, 83 की
कार्यु ाही की जा सके. और जिजससे र्युाचि क ा पर ाजार्युज दबा ब ाकर जमा कर े के लिलए
नि श निकर्युा जा सके और र्युाचि क ा की 482 संख्र्युा 13544/18 महत् ही की जा सके.”
LEGAL DISCUSSION :
18. In this regard, at this juncture it is imperative to spell out the
view taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Cout in Suo Motu Contempt
Petition (Crl.) No.1 OF 2020 IN RE : Prashant Bhushan and
another, whereby the Hon’ble Apex Court categorically expressed its
concern and observed thus :
ment is inflicted, not for the purpose of protecting either the Court as
a whole or the individual Judges of the Court from repetition of the
attack but for protecting the public and especially those who either
voluntarily or by compulsion are subject to the jurisdiction of the
Court, from the mischief they will incur if the authority of the Tri-
bunal is undermined or impaired. Hostile criticism of the judges or
judiciary is definitely an act of scandalizing the Court. Defamatory
publication concerning the Judge or institution brings impediment to
justice.”
Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2011) 7 SCC 776 , has noted the
dangerous trend of making false allegations against judicial officers
and observed as under:
"18. The dangerous trend of making false allegations against judicial
officers and humiliating them requires to be curbed with heavy hands,
otherwise the judicial system itself would collapse. The Bench and
the Bar have to avoid unwarranted situations on trivial issues that
hamper the cause of justice and are in the interest of none. "Liberty of
free expression is not to be confounded or confused with license to
make unfounded allegations against any institution, much less the
Judiciary". A lawyer cannot associate himself with his client
maligning the reputation of judicial officers merely because his client
failed to secure the desired order from the said officer. A deliberate
attempt to scandalise the court which would shake the confidence of
the litigating public in the system, would cause a very serious
damage to the Institution of judiciary. An Advocate in a profession
should be diligent and his conduct should also be diligent and
conform to the requirements of the law by which an Advocate plays a
vital role in the preservation of society and justice system. Any
violation of the principles of professional ethics by an Advocate is
unfortunate and unacceptable. (Vide: O.P. Sharma & Ors. v. High
Court of Punjab & Haryana, (2011) 5 SCALE 518)."
22. This Court records its strongest anguish and concern that the
people at large are now making unwarranted and unsubstantiated and
canards against the judicial officers relying upon their whims and
capricious and making irresponsible allegations of dishonesty. The
higher courts are duty bound to save the dignity and honour of the
system in general and the individual judicial officer as well that no
person is permitted to make a sweeping and wild allegations
regarding the integrity and character of any judicial officer.
24. If there is some such order passed by the trial court with which
the petitioner feels aggrieved, the right course is to challenge the
same in judicial capacity in the higher courts. The propriety or
correctness of any step or order taken or adopted by any judicial
13
26. We conclude that this is not a fit case where this court should
exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and as we have noted that the present petition is
filed levelling unsubstantiated allegations against the presiding officer
based on unfounded apprehensions and petitioner has wasted precious
time of the Court by filing frivolous litigation, under circumstances,
the present writ petition stands dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/- to
be paid to the State Exchequer.
27. The petitioner shall deposit the cost of Rs.50,000/- with the
14
Digitally signed by :-
MANISH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad