GUWAHATI, Feb 5 The division bench of the Gauhati High Court comprising Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Hrisikesh Roy today by a judgment passed in Contempt Case (Crl.) No. 1 of 2008 held guilty of commission of contempt by writer Sanjib Sobhapandit, Manoram Gogoi, editor, Sambhar of Asomiya Pratidin and Jatin Choudhury, publisher and printer of Sambhar of Asomiya Pratidin in publishing the article "Bharat Borokhot Nyai" ie "Justice in India" in the issue dated March 9, 2008 of Sambhar and accepting the apology tendered by the contemners, without imposing any penalty on them subject to condition that they shall publish their apology in an issue of Samnbhar within the next two weeks with a copy of the same to the Registry of the High Court.
The petitioner Bhardwaj Mrinal Choudhury, a practising advocate brought to the notice of the High Court regarding publication of the article wherein the author Sanjib Sobhapandit expressed his views and also denigrated and scandalised the dignity of the court. The court initiated the criminal contempt proceeding against the writer, editor and publisher of the magazine. The respondents have tendered their unconditional and unqualified apology in their respective affidavits for the inadvertent commission and omission and also submitted that the language of the article should have been different for which he is tendering sincere apologies to the court.
The court after hearing the case passed a well-discussed lengthy judgment of 28 pages highlighting the decisions pronounced by the Privy Council, Supreme Court and High Court on the issue. In the judgment, it was held that "the article in question, therefore, has the affect of not only tarnishing the image of the judiciary but also in effecting its credibility in the public mind. An average reader cannot but lose faith in the system on reading the article" and further held that the respondents have exceeded the acceptable frontiers of fair comment and criticism and they are found guilty of commission of contempt.
Furthermore, in the apology to the published by the respondents, it will be clearly indicated that the work in question was a work of fiction and further that in the future, the respondents will conduct themselves with utmost care and caution keeping in mind the principles of law as described in the judgment.
AK Bhattacharjee, senior advocate and MK Choudhury, advocate argued on behalf of the petitioner and B Bhuyan, advocate appeared on behalf of the respondents before the court.
Social Plugin