MR.CASSIAN CRASTO,GOA v. MR.RAJENDRA ARLEKAR AND 2 ORS
Case at a glance
- Bench
- R M LODHA
Outcome
Dismissed
The Contempt Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 s. 2(b)
Judgment
Operative part
MR.CASSIAN CRASTO,GOA VELHA,TISWADI GOA Versus ....Petitioners MR.RAJENDRA ARLEKAR AND 2 ORS., ....Respondents Petitioner in person. Coram:- R. M. LODHA, J. Date:- 26th August, 2005 P.C. Heard Cassian Crasto, the petitioner in person. By this Criminal Contempt Petition the petitioner contends that the Appeal issued by the Bharatiya Janata Party, Goa to the effect that the judgment passed by Justice Nelson Britto, requires to be corrected by the Appellate Court, as published in the newspaper "Herald" of its edition dated May 28, 2005, amounts to criminal contempt, under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971. Having considered the said appeal, I do not find that the appeal amounts to scandalizing the Court, or tends to scandalize the Court. If the Judgment and Order passed by the learned Judge in the opinion of the parties is wrong, it is always open to them to challenge the same and urge that such Judgment and Order needs to be corrected by the Appellate Court. Such statement does not amount to criminal contempt within the meaning of Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and no cognizance deserves to be taken of such matter in criminal contempt jurisdiction. The Contempt Petition is dismissed. R. M. LODHA, J.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The Contempt Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — s. 2(b).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.