Delhi High Court Sentences Man To One Month Jail For Threatening Local Commissioner With Gun
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sentenced a man to one month of simple imprisonment, along with Rs. 2,000 fine for threatening a Court appointment Local Commissioner with a pistol during execution of the commission. A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta held the man, Nitin Bansal, guilty of criminal contempt and disposed of the suo...
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sentenced a man to one month of simple imprisonment, along with Rs. 2,000 fine for threatening a Court appointment Local Commissioner with a pistol during execution of the commission.
A division bench comprising Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta held the man, Nitin Bansal, guilty of criminal contempt and disposed of the suo motu proceedings initiated against him.
“Accordingly, in terms of Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Contemnor is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month along with Rs.2,000/- as fine. If there is non-payment of fine, the sentence shall extend for a further period of 15 days,” the Court said.
The Court directed Bansal to voluntarily surrender before the concerned Jail Superintendent, Tihar Jail, adding that if he does not surrender on the said date, the concerned Jail Superintendent will be free to take action in accordance with law.
The suo motu contempt proceedings initiated after an order was passed by the single judge who was dealing with a plea seeking interim relief against the Bansal's father. The case related to disposal of 30,000 tons of industrial coal.
In May last year, Bansal's father was restrained from dealing with 30,000 tons of industrial coal. Alleging contempt on his part, the petitioners then filed an application seeking appointment of local commissioner.
A woman local commissioner was appointed who visited the premises in Faridabad in July last year, along with police officials.
In her report, the local commissioner said that during the execution, there was a complete non-cooperative attitude on behalf of Bansal, the contemnor.
It was stated that attempts were made to intimidate and threaten the Local Commissioner and that Bansal placed a pistol on the table in the midst of execution of the commission. The pistol was confiscated by the police as it was suspected that the same was unlicensed. Criminal proceedings were then initiated against Bansal.
In the contempt proceedings, the only plea raised by Bansal was that the alleged object used to threaten the local commissioner was a toy gun and not a real gun. However, later, on examination, the object was found to be a real gun and not a toy gun.
On this, the Court observed:
“Thus, clearly, the plea of the Contemnor/ Respondent was a false, misleading plea and was taken only to pull wool over the eyes of the Court, with the hope that the Court would never call for the physical gun itself.”
The Bench said that a Local Commissioner appointed by any Court is an extension of the Court itself, and that Bansal left no stone unturned in committing illegalities after illegalities.
“Yet, the Contemnor shows no remorse. The unconditional apology tendered by the Contemnor is nothing but a lip service. Thus, owing to the deliberate obstruction by the Contemnor, this Court does not find it appropriate to accept the apology tendered,” the Court said.
It added that the non-cooperative conduct of Bansal, coupled with the fact that the gun was placed on the table by him during the course of the proceedings being conducted by the
Local Commissioner, demonstrated that be intended to obstruct the task entrusted to her by the Court.
“Such conduct on the part of the Contemnor reflects a deliberate attempt with evil motive towards the interference in the administration of justice, and therefore, contemnor is liable to be punished for criminal contempt,” the Court said.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. NITIN BANSAL