Allahabad High Court
RADHEY SHYAM SONIversusSRI CHARCHIT GAUR, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
No case for contempt was established; the contempt application is dismissed.
Summary
The applicant filed Writ Petition No. 52714 of 2008, which the court disposed on 14 October 2008, allowing the petitioner to raise his grievance through representation before the authorities. The applicant alleges that the representation remains pending after eighteen years. The court observed that the writ court had not issued any substantive direction, merely permitting the grievance to be raised, and noted that Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 sets a limitation period for contempt proceedings under Section 12. Since the alleged contempt occurred beyond the prescribed period and no contemptuous act was identified, the court found no case for contempt. Consequently, the contempt application was dismissed as misconceived.
Issues considered
- Whether the contempt application is maintainable given the lapse of the limitation period under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
- Whether any act of contempt was committed by the respondents in relation to the pending representation
Legislation cited
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — s. 12, 20
Subjects
- contempt of court
- limitation period
- writ petition
- representation
- High Court
- procedural law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2970 of 2026
Radhey Shyam Soni
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Sri Charchit Gaur, District Magistrate And 4 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhtar Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. The Writ Petition No. 52714 of 2008 filed by the applicant was
disposed of on 14.10.2008 permitting the petitioner to raise his grievance
through representation before the authorities.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the representation is
pending since then and the same has not been decided.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, this Court finds that
writ Court had refused to issue any direction in the matter and had only
left it open to the applicant to raise his grievance before appropriate
authority on 14.10.2008. Eighteen years have elapsed since passing of the
said order. Section 20 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 provides the
period of limitation for approaching this Court under Section 12 of the
Act of 1971.
4. No case for contempt is made out.
5. The contempt application is misconceived and stands dismissed.
(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
May 5, 2026
(V. S. SINGH)
Digitally signed by :-
VIDYA SAGAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…