Allahabad High Court
ABHIMANYU VERMAversusSURESH MISHRA
- Decided
- Bench
- KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA
Holding
The contempt application is barred by Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act and is dismissed.
Summary
The applicant, Abhimanyu Verma, filed a contempt application alleging willful disobedience of an order dated 16 March 2022 passed in Writ B No. 483 of 2022. The application was filed 950 days after the alleged contempt, far beyond the one‑year period prescribed by Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act. The applicant argued that despite service of the order, compliance had not been achieved even in February 2026. The Court examined Section 20, which bars initiation of contempt proceedings after one year from the alleged act, and held that the statutory limitation applies irrespective of who seeks compliance. Consequently, the Court dismissed the contempt application as barred by limitation, noting that the applicant may pursue other remedies. The dismissal does not preclude any other legal recourse available to the applicant.
Issues considered
- Whether the contempt application filed 950 days after the alleged contempt is barred by Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Legislation cited
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — s. 20
Subjects
- contempt of court
- limitation period
- Section 20
- High Court of Allahabad
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3289 of 2026
Abhimanyu Verma
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Suresh Mishra
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rishabh Kumar Pandey, Santosh
Kumar Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Court No. - 9
HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
2. This application has been filed alleging willful and deliberate
disobedience of the order dated 16.03.2022 passed in Writ B No. 483 of
2022.
3. The application is reported to be beyond time by 950 days.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was
respondent No. 3 in the writ petition and although the order was served by
the writ petitioner of that petition on the authority concerned, the
applicant also, recently in February, 2026, has filed the order, even then,
compliance has not been made.
5. Section 20 of Contempt of Courts Act provides that no court shall
initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or
otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which
the contempt is alleged to have been committed. Section 20 does not
provide for any leverage and, in fact, cognizance is not dependent upon
the fact as to at whose instance the compliance is being prayed for. The
statutory rider is meant for Court only.
6. In view of above, the present contempt application is hit by Section 20
of the Act and, therefore, cannot be entertained.
CAPL No. 3289 of 2026
2
7. The application is hereby dismissed as barred by limitation.
8. Dismissal of application shall not preclude the applicant to take
recourse to remedies that may be available to him other than filing of
contempt application based upon order dated 16.03.2022.
(Kshitij Shailendra,J.)
May 18, 2026
Sazia
Digitally signed by :-
SAZIA AQUIL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…