Allahabad High Court
SMT. ANITA PANDEYversusSRI MANGALA PRASAD SINGH, DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
- Decided
- Bench
- ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Holding
A prima facie case of contempt exists, but the Court refrains from issuing notice and instead grants the opposite party time to comply, disposing of the application at this stage.
Summary
The applicant, Smt. Anita Pandey, filed a contempt application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act against the District Magistrate for allegedly willfully disobeying the High Court's order dated 19‑11‑2025 in Writ Petition No. 17949 of 2025. The order was served on 10‑12‑2025 but, according to the applicant, remained unimplemented. The Court observed that a prima facie case of contempt existed but chose not to issue a notice at this stage. Instead, it directed the parties to arrange for service of the order and gave the opposite party three months to comply. The Court also laid down procedural steps for communication between the parties and indicated that the applicant could approach the Court again if compliance was not achieved. The contempt application was therefore disposed of without a final determination of contempt.
Issues considered
- Whether the District Magistrate's failure to comply with the High Court's order constitutes contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act.
- Whether a notice should be issued to the opposite party before proceeding with contempt proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Contempt of Courts Act — s. 12
Subjects
- contempt of court
- willful disobedience
- Section 12
- High Court order
- compliance
- procedural directions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2987 of 2026
Smt. Anita Pandey
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Sri Mangala Prasad Singh, District Magistrate
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
2. The present contempt application has been filed under Section 12 of the
Contempt of Courts Act for punishing the Opposite Party for willful
disobedience of the judgment and order dated 19.11.2025 passed by this
Court in Writ Petition No. 17949 of 2025.
3. It is contended that applicant had approached writ Court through
aforesaid writ petition, which was disposed of vide order dated
19.11.2025. Copy of the order of writ Court was served upon opposite
party on 10.12.2025 personally, but according to the applicant, the said
order has not been complied with by the opposite party till date.
4. Prima facie, a case has been made out for punishing the opposite party
for willful disobedience of the judgment and order passed in the aforesaid
writ petition.
5. However, no notice is issued to the opposite party at this stage. The
opposite party is granted three months' further time to comply with the
order dated 19.11.2025 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 17949 of
2025 from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
6. The applicant shall supply a duly stamped registered envelope
addressed to the opposite party and another self-addressed envelope to the
office within two weeks from today. The office shall send a copy of this
order along with the self-addressed envelope of the applicant with a copy
of contempt application to the opposite party within one week thereafter
and keep a record thereof.
CAPL No. 2987 of 2026
2
7. The opposite party shall comply with the directions of the writ court
and intimate the applicant the order through the self-addressed envelop
within a week thereafter.
8. In case, the opposite party does not comply with the order, it would be
open to the applicant to approach this court again.
9. With the aforesaid observations, this application is finally disposed of
at this stage.
(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…