LexIN RE: BINEET KUMAR SINGH versus -
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A IN RE: BINEET KUMAR SINGH MAY 3, 2001 ,;_._ [G.B. PATTANAIK AND B.N. AGRAWAL, JJ.] B Constitution of India, 1950: Article 129. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 I~ c Section 2(c)-Criminal Contempt-Scope of-Court Order-Forgery and utilisation of-Contempt of Court-Punishment for. State of Maharashtra-Course in Physical Education-Educational Institution-Writ for direction that students be permitted to sit in the examination-Order passed by High Court-Special Leave Petition-Order D of Supreme Court-Forgery of-Enquiry-Complicity of contemnor established-Contemnor held guilty of criminal contempt-Sentence of simple imprisonment of six months-Imposition of-When a person is found to have utilised an order of a Court which he or she knows to be incorrect for 'y conferring benefit on persons who are not entitled to the same, the very E utilisation of the fabricated order by the person concerned would be sufficient to hold him/her guilty of contempt, irrespective of the fact whether he or she himself or herself is the author of fabrication-Contemnor in this case got the order forged and tried to utilise the same, on the basis of forgery made to obtain favourable orders from the Government for holding an examination for the students of the institution, who were not otherwise eligible to appear r ..i- F at the examination-It amounts to polluting the course of justice and a grave act of contempt. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 403 of 1999 in I.A. No. 3. G IN Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 13320/1998. From the Judgment and Order dated 8.7.99 of the Bombay High Court .~ H in W.P. No. 1621 of 1998. 424 IN RE: BINEET KUMAR SINGH 425 Altaf Ahmed, Additional Solicitor General, S.S. Shinde for S:V. A Deshpande, A.K. Sanghi, A.K. Dutta, B.P. Yadav for Mohan Pandey and B.D. Sharma for the appearing parties. The following Orders of the Court was delivered : On account of a serious disquieting feature in relation to an order B passed by this Court, this Court took suo motu cognizance and issued notice as to why the persons involved, should not be dealt with under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act. Pursuant to the notice issued, show cause, being one of denial, it necessitated an inquiry and the inquiry was conducted by the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, who on the basis of evidence lead before C him, has submitted a Report. After getting the said Report, objections were filed on behalf of contemners and they have been heard at length being represented by their respective counsel. The State of Maharashtra, introduced a course in Physical Education called C.P. Ed. course. A person acquiring the said diploma would be eligible D for being considered for the post of a Physical Instructor in the schools. In the recent past, there has been a mushroom growth of private institutions and the founders of such institutions make huge sum of money by admitting students from different parts of the country and by conferring degree or . diploma on them. But every such institution requires permission of the E concerned State Government as well as the affiliation to any university, failing which the so-called diploma/degree from the institution will be of no use. One such institution with which we are concerned in the present case in Lokmata Indira Gandhi College of Sports, Yavatmal. The institution used to run by Late Savitribai Sikshan Prasarak Mandal, Yavatmal (for short referred to as 'the K. S. S.P. Mandal '). The Government of Maharashtra did not grant permission F to the institution for the academic year 1994-95 but the institution admitted several students and then persuaded the Government for grant of permission. At later stage, the government did grant the permission for the academic year 1994-95, so that the students who have already studied in the institution could appear in the examination. An examination was conducted in the year G 1996 but many of the students could not appear in the said examination, allegedly because of lack of proper information. K.S.S.P. Mandal, therefore, filed a writ petition in the Nagpur High Court for a direction that the remaining students who have already studied for the academic session 1994-95, should be permitted to appear at the examination to be held by the appropriate authority. That application, however was withdrawn by the counsel appearing H 426 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2001] 3 S.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.