Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
MCA/1880/2009 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 1880 of 2009
In
MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 1538 of 2008
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2379 of 2008
=========================================================
RAMESHBHAI
P RAVAL - Applicant(s)
Versus
J
J SHAH &/OR HIS SUCCESSOR IN OFFICE, DEPUTY REGISTRAR & 3 -
Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
KG PANDIT for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR KL PANDYA, AGP for Opponent(s) : 1 -
3.
NOTICE SERVED for Opponent(s) : 1 - 2, 4,
MR AJ YAGNIK for
Opponent(s) :
4,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
and
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 30/07/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
This
Court (Coram: A.L. Dave and Ms.H.N. Devani, J.J.), on 2.2.2010, had
passed the following order :-
Opponent
No.4, Baldevbhai M. Patel, party-in-person, is present. When his
attention was drawn to use of improper language and improper
behaviour and to likelihood of exposing himself to fresh contempt
proceedings by this Court and when he was asked if he would like to
engage an advocate or would need help of an advocate under legal
aid, he indicated that he would engage an advocate within ten days.
Hence, S.O. to 16.2.2010.
Thereafter,
the reply has been submitted dated 6.7.2010 and in the reply itself,
the contempnor has gone to the extent of, not only using
unparliamentary language, but also making allegations against the
earlier Bench of this Court. Prima facie, such can be said to be a
criminal contempt on the face of the Court and that too, against the
Contempt Bench before the Contempt Bench. Stern action and strong
punishment would be required to be imposed, if ultimately sufficient
explanation does not come on record.
At
this stage, Mr.Yagnik, learned Counsel appearing for the contempnor,
seeks time to file reply and submit explanation, if any, available
to him.
Hence,
S.O. to 13.8.2010. It is
directed that the contempnor shall personally remain present.
We
would have directed the Police Inspector of Ghatlodia Police Station
to ensure the presence of the contempnor. However, Mr.Yagnik,
learned Counsel appearing for the contempnor, under the instructions
of his client, undertakes that the contempnor, who is present, shall
remain personally present on the next date.
We
also direct that the State of Gujarat through learned Public
Prosecutor and the Police Inspector, Ghatlodia Police Station, shall
be impleaded as party respondents. The Police Inspector, Ghatlodia
Police Station shall remain personally present on that day.
(Jayant
Patel, J.)
30.7.2010 (Smt.
Abhilasha Kumari, J.)
vinod
Top