Patna High Court

SAKINA BEGUMversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 June 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The petition does not constitute criminal contempt; the appropriate remedy is civil contempt, and without the Advocate General's consent the criminal contempt petition is not maintainable.

Summary

The petitioner, Sakina Begum, filed an Original Criminal Miscellaneous petition seeking criminal contempt against three respondents for allegedly refusing to comply with a 2018 criminal revision order directing payment of Rs. 2 lakh by April 2020. The High Court examined whether willful disobedience of an order issued in criminal jurisdiction amounts to civil or criminal contempt and whether the court can proceed without the Advocate General's written consent under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It held that the facts do not fall within the definition of criminal contempt under Section 2(c) but may constitute civil contempt under Section 2(b). Since the Advocate General had refused consent, the criminal contempt petition was not maintainable. The court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the application and advised filing a civil contempt petition, dismissing the original petition as not maintainable.

Issues considered

Whether willful disobedience of an order passed under criminal jurisdiction gives rise to civil contempt or criminal contempt.
Whether the High Court can entertain a criminal contempt proceeding without the written consent of the Advocate General under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Legislation cited

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — s. 15(1)(b), 2(b), 2(c)

Subjects

contempt of court
civil contempt
criminal contempt
willful disobedience
Advocate General consent
Patna High Court

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Or. Criminal Miscellaneous No.4 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2012 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Buxar
======================================================
SAKINA BEGUM W/O ABID HUSSAIN D/O LATE ABDUL SATTAR R/v-
Chousa Near Durga Mandir, P.S.- Buxar (Muffasil), District- Buxar At present
115/241 Maswanpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur (U.P.)

... ... Petitioner/s
Versus

1. The State of Bihar
2. ABID HUSSAIN S/O MD. EKBAL R/v- Durga Chousa Near Mandir, P.S.-
Buxar (Muffasil), District- Buxar
3. JUBAIDA BEGUM W/O MD. EKBAL R/v- Durga Chousa Near Mandir,
P.S.- Buxar (Muffasil), District- Buxar
4. MD. EKBAL S/O LATE ABDUL SAMMAN R/v- Durga Chousa Near
Mandir, P.S.- Buxar (Muffasil), District- Buxar

... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 19-06-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the State.

2. The present case has been filed for willful and

deliberate disobedience of the order dated 05.09.2019 passed in

Cr. Rev. No. 521/2018 by the Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble

Court, which has not been complied with by O.P. No. 2 of Cr.

Rev. No. 521/2018.
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
2/15

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

present Original Criminal Miscellaneous case has been filed

under the Original Criminal Miscellaneous jurisdiction for

initiation of contempt proceedings against the private

respondent/private O.Ps.

4. The office has pointed out certain defects. The first

defect is that the learned Advocate General has refused to grant

consent for filing this petition. Secondly, the provision of law

mentioned on the first page is required to be verified and

corrected.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

order in question was passed in a criminal revision and,

therefore, a petition for criminal contempt would lie.

Accordingly, the present criminal contempt petition has been

filed.

6. With regard to the refusal of the learned Advocate

General to grant consent for filing the present petition, learned

counsel submits that he has nothing to say on the opinion

rendered by the learned Advocate General and prays that an

appropriate order may be passed. However, he fairly submits

that the present petition has been filed on account of the alleged

disobedience of the order passed by this Court in the criminal
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
3/15

revision.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, it

transpires to this Court that a legal question is involved in the

present matter, namely, whether, in a case where an order passed

under the criminal jurisdiction has not been complied with or

has been disobeyed, a petition for civil contempt would lie or a

petition for criminal contempt would lie.

8. Another question which requires consideration is

whether, once the learned Advocate General, in exercise of his

powers under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act,

1971, has opined that no case of criminal contempt is made out,

this Court can take cognizance of criminal contempt or not.

9. In order to answer these two questions, it is

necessary to examine the definitions of civil contempt and

criminal contempt as provided under the Contempt of Courts

Act, 1971. The definition of "civil contempt", as contained in

Section 2(b) thereof, reads as follows:

(b) "civil contempt" means wilful
disobedience to any judgment, decree,
direction, order, writ or other process of a
Court or wilful breach of an undertaking
given to a Court;

10. Whereas, the definition of "criminal contempt", as
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
4/15

contained in Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971,

is reproduced hereinbelow:

(c) "criminal contempt" means the
publication (whether by words, spoken or
written, or by signs, or by visible
representations, or otherwise) of any matter
or the doing of any other act whatsoever
which-
(i) scandalises or tends to
scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the
authority of, any Court; or
(ii) prejudices, or interferes or
tends to interfere with, the due course of any
judicial proceeding; or
(iii) interferes or tends to interfere
with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the
administration of justice in any other
manner.
11. Upon a bare reading of the definition of "civil

contempt", it transpires to this Court that the situations in which

civil contempt may arise are as follows:

(a) willful disobedience to any judgment;

(b) willful disobedience to any decree;

(d) willful disobedience to any order;

(e) willful disobedience to any writ; and
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
5/15

(f) willful disobedience to any other process of a court

(g) willful breach of an undertaking given to a court.

12. In the present case, in Cr. Revision No. 521 of

2018, the Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court issued

directions in paragraph 6 of the order, which read as follows:

6. Having regard to the aforesaid,
the application stands disposed off in terms
of the compromise arrived between the
parties which is recorded hereinunder:
(i) The opposite parties no. 2 to 4
shall pay Rs. 2 lakhs to the petitioner, either
in one go or in installments, but the same
shall be paid latest by 30th April, 2020.
Thereafter, an affidavit shall be filed on
behalf of the opposite parties no. 2 to 4,
latest by 10th May, 2020, by way of an
Interlocutory Application in the present case
itself bringing on record materials showing
payment of Rs. 2 lakhs.
(ii) In the meantime, the opposite
party no. 2 shall not press the Divorce case
and the petitioner shall not press her
Maintenance case.
(iii) After the entire amount of Rs.
2 lakhs is paid by 30th April, 2020, the
petitioner shall file a petition in Divorce
case with regard to her not opposing the
divorce. The Court below shall pass
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
6/15

appropriate orders in terms thereof within
one month from the date of filing of the
compromise petition.
(iv) The petitioner shall also, upon
receiving Rs. 2 lakhs withdraw her
Maintenance case filed before the Court
below within one month of Rs. 2 lakhs being
paid to her.
13. It transpires to this Court that O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 in

the aforesaid Cr. Revision No. 521 of 2018 (who are O.P. Nos. 2

to 4 in the present Original Cr. Misc. No. 4 of 2023) were

directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the petitioner, either in

one lump sum or in installments, latest by 30th April, 2020.

However, the said amount has not been paid.

14. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner has

filed the present Original Cr. Misc. application seeking initiation

of criminal contempt proceedings against O.P. Nos. 2 to 4.

15. From a plain reading of the definition of "criminal

contempt", it transpires that the essential ingredients for

initiation of criminal contempt proceedings are as follows:-

Publication (whether by word, spoken or writing,

or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of

any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which-

(a) scandalises the court; or
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
7/15

(b) tends to scandalise the court; or

(d) or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or

(e) prejudices the due course of any judicial

proceedings; or

(f) interferes the due course of any judicial

proceedings; or

(g) tends to interfere the due course of any judicial

proceedings; or

(h) interferes with the administration of justice in any

other manner; or

(i) tends to interfere with the administration of justice

in any other manner; or

(j) obstructs the administration of justice in any other

manner; or

(k) tends to obstruct the administration of justice in

any other manner.

16. In the present case, this Court is of the considered

view that the case of the present petitioner does not fall under

any of the categories enumerated under Section 2(c) of the

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Hence, the present case does not

constitute criminal contempt.
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
8/15

17. On the other hand, the facts of the case may fall

within the category of willful disobedience of the order or

willful breach of the undertaking given to the Court at the time

of passing the order in Cr. Revision No. 521 of 2018.

18. By virtue of the aforesaid discussion, it transpires

to this Court that disobedience may occur in proceedings arising

out of criminal jurisdiction as well as civil jurisdiction, however,

the ingredients for civil contempt or criminal contempt are

based on different horizons.

19. This Court is unable to accept the contention of

learned counsel for the petitioner that since the order passed in

exercise of criminal jurisdiction has not been complied with,

therefore, the same would amount to criminal contempt.

20. This Court is in full agreement with the opinion of

the learned Advocate General, which is quoted hereinbelow:

“ I have gone through the contents

of this petition and after due consideration

in my opinion no criminal contempt is made

out and the facts stated in the petition, no

case is made out for grant of consent for

making a motion under section 15(1)(b) of

the contempt of Court Act and accordingly
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
9/15

consent is refused.”

21. However, this Court is conscious of the second

question as to, whether this Court is bound by the opinion of the

learned Advocate General or not? In order to answer this

question, it is necessary to examine Section 15 of the Contempt

of Courts Act, 1971, which provides as follows:-

15. Cognizance of criminal
contempt in other cases.-(1) In the case of a
criminal contempt, other than a contempt
referred to in section 14, the Supreme Court
or the High Court may take action on its
own motion or on a motion made by-
(a) the Advocate-General, or
(b) any other person, with the
consent in writing of the Advocate- General,
²[or]
2[(c) in relation to the High Court
for the Union territory of Delhi, such Law
Officer as the Central Government may, by
notification in the Official Gazette, specify in
this behalf, or any other person, with the
consent in writing of such Law Officer.]
(2) In the case of any criminal
contempt of a subordinate Court, the High
Court may take action on a reference made
to it by the subordinate Court or on a motion
made by the Advocate-General or, in relation
to a Union territory, by such Law Officer as
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
10/15

the Central Government may, by notification
in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf.
(3) Every motion or reference
made under this section shall specify the
contempt of which the person charged is
alleged to be guilty.
Explanation. In this section, the
expression "Advocate-General" means-
(a) in relation to the Supreme
Court, the Attorney-General or the Solicitor-
General;
(b) in relation to the High Court,
the Advocate-General of the State or any of
the States for which the High Court has been
established;
(c) in relation to the Court of a
Judicial Commissioner, such Law Officer as
the Central Government may, by notification
in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf.

22. Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

deals with the cognizance of criminal contempt in other cases.

The said provision is clear that, in the case of a criminal

contempt, other than a contempt referred to in Section 14, the

Supreme Court or the High Court may take action on its own

motion or on a motion made by-

(a) the Advocate-General, or
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
11/15

(b) any other person, with the consent in writing of

the Advocate-General.

23. In the present case, the situation falls within the

category of Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act,

1971 wherein the petitioner, being "any other person", has filed

the present Original Cr. Misc. application, for which the written

consent of the learned Advocate General is required. However,

the opinion of the learned Advocate General is in the negation.

24. The question which arises for consideration is

whether the Hon’ble High Court or the Hon’ble Supreme Court

can ignore the opinion of the learned Advocate General given in

writing or not. The answer to this question is already provided

under Section 15(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It is

well within the power of the Hon’ble Supreme Court or the

Hon’ble High Court to take action on its own motion, however,

if the opinion of the learned Advocate General is ignored, the

same would amount to the Hon’ble Supreme Court or the

Hon’ble High Court taking action on its own motion. The

second question is answered accordingly.

25. It is relevant to mention here that a similar issue

has been decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the

case of Anand Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors., on
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
12/15

05.04.2023 in MJC No. 26 of 2023 arising out of Cr.WJC No.

723 of 2022. In the said case, the Stamp Reporter had pointed

out Defect No. 16. The relevant extract of the said order is as

follows:-

Perused the stamp report defect.
The Stamp Reporter has pointed out defect
no. 16 in the following terms:-

"As per para-1 of
M.J.C. petition, the present
matter arises from cr.w.j.c. no.-
723/2022 vide order dated
29.09.2022. For proper remedy,
it may perhaps be filed in
original criminal miscellaneous
cases as per provision
contained in U/S 3(1) of
chapter XXVIII of the rules of
Patna High Court Act."

This Court finds that the present
application has been filed seeking initiation
of a proceeding of contempt for willful
disobedience and disregard shown to the
order of this Court. This Court is a Court of
Record. Reference in this regard may be
made to Article 215 of the Constitution of
India. This Court is well empowered to
initiate a contempt proceeding for willful
disobedience and disregard shown to the
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
13/15

order of this Court.

In the nature of the grievance of
the petitioner, he is not required to file a
criminal contempt in terms of Section 15 of
the Contempt of Court Act. Therefore, the
stamp report defect saying that this
application should be filed as original
Criminal Miscellaneous as per the provision
contained under Chapter XXVIII of the
Patna High Court Rules is not correct.

This Court has noticed that the
Stamp Reporter has mentioned 'Rule' 3(i) as
'Section' 3(1) and he has further written
"Chapter XXVIII of the rules of Patna High
Court Act". To this Court, it appears that the
Stamp Reporter should be more cautious
while submitting their report and such
mistakes which give an impression that he
has not looked into the Patna High Court
Rules would not be in a good taste. The
stamp report defect no. 16 is overruled.

26. Hence, this Court, on the basis of the discussions,

reasoning, and the ratio laid down hereinabove, reaches the

conclusion that the Original Cr. Misc. is not required to be filed

against an order/judgment passed in Cr. WJC jurisdiction.

Rather, the question of civil or criminal contempt has to be

decided in terms of the definitions of "Civil Contempt" and
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
14/15

"Criminal Contempt", as the case may be, defined in Sections

2(b) and 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

27. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits before

this Court that permission may kindly be granted to convert the

present Original Cr. Misc. petition into an MJC petition and

treat the present case as an MJC case by allowing such

conversion.

28. This Court, at this juncture, may grant permission

to convert the present petition, however, such conversion at this

stage may adversely affect the petitioner for the reason that this

Court, while exercising jurisdiction under the Original Cr. Misc.

jurisdiction, may not examine the maintainability or

entertainability of the MJC petition. Further, learned counsel for

the petitioner is also not in a position to demonstrate that all the

ingredients necessary for initiation of civil contempt

proceedings are available in the pleadings of the present case.

29. Therefore, this Court restrains itself from passing

any further order, save and except observing that the present

Original Cr. Misc. application is not maintainable.

30. This Court grants permission to the petitioner to

withdraw the present application with liberty to file a petition

for civil contempt, if the petitioner is so advised and the
Patna High Court OR. CR. MISC No.4 of 2023 dt.19-06-2026
15/15

ingredients of civil contempt are available to him.

31. Since the matter has remained pending since 2023,

the period during which the Original Cr. Misc. case remained

pending shall not be counted for the purpose of limitation.

32. With the aforesaid observations, the present

Original Cr. Misc. application is hereby dismissed as not

maintainable.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

Aman Kumar/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 24.06.2026
Transmission Date NA

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.