After hearing the criminal contempt petition, the division bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra, on Monday, imposed a fine of Rs 2,000 to be deposited with the Registry of this court within a period of 15 days from the date of this order to the petitioner Satyapal Anand (90), failing which he is directed to undergo simple imprisonment of 15 days. He is further warned to remain cautious in future while dealing with the court’s cases. Accordingly, the proceedings of criminal contempt are disposed off. This criminal contempt proceedings have been initiated suo motu in pursuance to an order passed by this court on December 3, 2012, in writ petition wherein this court observed as under that during course of arguments the petitioner, while criticising the order dated July 17, 2012, passed by this court, submitted that the order was biased. It is further submitted that the Acting Chief Justice who has passed the order was a biased person.

 

Thereupon, when this court pointed out to the petitioner that such a statement is in contempt of the court, he said that the learned judge was a biased person in this case. Inspite of bringing to the notice of the petitioner that this may amount to contempt of court, the petitioner reasserted the statement. In the circumstances, issue notice to the petitioner calling upon him to show cause as to why proceedings for contempt of court be not initiated against him. Notice be made returnable within a period of two weeks. Petitioner waives service of notice. The petitioner prays for and is granted two weeks time to file a reply. The division bench mentioned in the order that it is not disputed that the age of the contemnor is above 90 years. The medical documents which are filed in pursuance to the court’s order clearly reflect that he is suffering from various ailments. The doctor has observed that he is unable to walk or move around. On examination by the board, it is found that he is suffering from hyperiensive, has pedal edema, crept at base, he has glove stocking anaesthesia, significant hearing loss and all large joints have significant crepitus. Hence, we are of the view that it would be appropriate to impose a punishment of payment of fine.

 

HC dismisses plea seeking quashing of FIR The division bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh has dismissed the petition filed by petitioner, Rajendra Kumar Batham, a retired Judicial Officer, praying for quashing of FIR dated December 29, 2021, registered at Police Station, Economic Offences Wing, Bhopal, for offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 409 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and sections 7, 13(1)(a) & 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The division bench of the MPHC has said in the order that resultantly, looking to the facts of the present case as well as the law on the point, as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, this court is of the view that quashment of the FIR registered at EOW Police Station, Bhopal, cannot be allowed as this FIR fails to satisfy the test of sameness and consequences, because the complainant, accused and nature of allegations in crime registered at Police Station, Industrial Area, Dewas, and FIR by EOW Police Station are not the same. This court has deliberately not gone deep into the matter by way of dealing with every transaction of embezzled money date by date, lest it may prejudice the case of either party during pending trial/further investigation in crime. The division bench added that consequently, there is no merit in this petition and hence, it stands dismissed. It is made clear that the investigating agency is free to investigate the matter in free and fair manner without being influenced by the observations made in this order.