Contempt of Court - Arnesh Kumar Supreme Court Judgment

CONTEMPT OF COURT BY COPS

To                                                                                Dated 29/02/2016

Hon’ble Ms. G. Rohini Ji

O/o Hon’ble CHIEF JUSTICE (DHC),

Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road,

New Delhi-110003

Sub:-  Complaint Against SHO Rohini North East Delhi for Contempt of Court to be instituted before the High Court having territorial jurisdiction i.e., before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court & also departmental action against SHO Rohini r/w Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar judgment dated 02/07/2014

Respected Sir,

(1)  As per the reference number (annexed for your kind perusal)

No.3/5/2008-Judl.Cell

Government of India/ Bharat Sarkar

Ministry of Home Affairs/ Grih Mantralaya

dated 11 JUL 2014

as per the above reference number the Ministry of Home Affairs issued an advisory with the subjectAdvisory on measures to be taken by the States/UTs to curb the misuse of section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code- regarding which reads as follows:-

The Government has, from time to time, issued advisories on measures to be taken by the States/UTs to curb the misuse of section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. On 02.07.2014 the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar and Anr. (copy enclosed), observed that there is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years and the fact that section 498-A is a cognizable and non bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shields by disgruntled wives. The Supreme Court has observed the following:

i) All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41, Cr.PC;

ii) All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub-clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii);

iii) The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention;

iv) The Magistrate while authorising detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorise detention;

v) The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing;

vi) Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing;

vii) Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction.

viii) Authorising detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court.

3. The Hon’ble Court has directed that a copy of the judgment should be forwarded to the Chief Secretaries as also the Directors General of Police of all the State Governments and the Union Territories and the Registrar General of all the High Courts for onward transmission and ensuring its compliance.

4. All the State Governments/UT Administrations are requested to take effective measures to scrupulously enforce the directions/order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as also the advisories issued by the Government of India from time to time.

5. The receipt of this letter may kindly be acknowledged.

Yours Faithfully

(J. P. Agrawal)

Joint Secretary (Judicial)

Ph No. 23438113

(2)  That it is most humbly & respectfully submitted that the Hon’ble SHO is in Contempt of the above advisory viz., vi) Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing; because I filed an RTI (annexed for your kind perusal) and within point no.16, 17, 18 & 19 thereof I asked the following questions:-

16. That as per Arnesh Kumar Judgment, Notice of appearance in terms of section 41A of CrPC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing. Hence, kindly supply me the certified photocopy of the reasons on record for extension of this time period.

17. Kindly supply me the name & rank of the officer who extended this time period as above.

18. Kindly supply me all the dates when this time period as above was extended.

19. Kindly supply me the certified photocopy of the reasons on record for extension of this time period on all such dates if such time extension as above was extended more than one time.

But the Hon’ble SHO has written answers to all these as N.A. which means Not Applicable (RTI Reply with response by PIO is annexed for your kind perusal).

(3)  That it is respectfully submitted that this FIR No. 599/14 PS Rohini was registered in February 2014 whereas the Arnesh Kumar Judgment & the above advisory was enforced/ implemented thereafter in July 2014 but the undiarized & undated 41A Notice was sent around 18 months after this above advisory came into enforcement/ implementation hence from July 2014 to Feb’2016 there was no extension of time period as per the SHO’s own admission through the above RTI Reply (annexed) hence this undiarized & undated 41A Notice (annexed for your kind perusal) which was sent to me was probably sent in contempt of the above advisory & also in contempt of the Arnesh Kumar Judgment.

PRAYER:- Suitable Action in the light of above facts & circumstances.

(ATUR CHATUR)

C/o Q-7/77, GF, Sector-30, Rohini, Delhi-110085

Phone:                          09873540498
Email:             aturchatur@yahoo.com

Enclosed:-

1          Advisory No.3/5/2008-Judl.Cell as discussed above by MHA dated 11 JUL 2014

2          RTI dated 07/02/2016 (as discussed above)

3          RTI Reply by SHO through PIO concerned (as discussed above)

4          Undiarized & Undated 41A Notice (as discussed above)

(ATUR CHATUR)

C/o Q-7/77, GF, Sector-30, Rohini, Delhi-110085

Phone:                          09873540498
Email:             aturchatur@yahoo.com