0704 07 Contempt of Court Case : Bal Kishan Giri Vs State of UP

0704 07 Contempt of Court Case : Bal Kishan Giri Vs State of UP 

CASE NAME: Bal Kishan Giri Vs State of UP 

PETITIONER: Bal Kishan Giri                    RESPONDENT: Vs State of UP

BENCH:   

P Sathasivam,

A.K. Sikri

 

CITATION:  

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 555 OF 2010

 

LAWS INVOLVED:  

Contempt of Court Act, 1971

 

FACTS:

There was Sitaram Hostel in Meerut. Sunil Kumar, Puneet Kumar Giri, Sudhir Kumar and other students were staying there. Students Sunil Kumar, Puneet Kumar Giri, Sudhir Kumar disappeared suddenly on 23 May 2008. Sunil Kumar's brother, Anil Kumar filed an FIR   at the police station. As the students were missing since 22 May 2008 night, an FIR was filed on 23 May 2008.

The next day of an FIR the police found 3 dead bodies. A criminal case was registered against an unknown person. Some criminals were caught. Those criminals applied for bail in District Court Meerut. But the court rejected it further they applied for bail in the High Court. 

Meanwhile Balkishan Giri was a lawyer, Puneet Kumar Giri was his nephew. On August 14, 2009, he filed an application in the Allahabad High Court.  He wrote that all the criminals have a criminal background and have earned wealth through their illegal means. They have close ties with local MLAs and former MLAs. He has good relations in the High Court.  J. S. K. Jain, J. V.  Verma, J.S.C. Nigam 's names were in it. He was afraid they may get bail instead the justice. 

The High Court sent a show cause notice, Why the contempt case should not be initiated against you?  

Thereafter, on 21 Nov 2009, the appellant tendered an unconditional apology stating that he had been misled by the Meerut district lawyers and that he had sent the application as he was under great mental stress due to the murder of his nephew.

The allegations leveled by the appellant against the 3 Judges of the High Court are very serious, scandalous and sufficient to detract from the dignity of the law and the reputation of the Court and are also without any basis. The appellant is a practicing advocate. His plea that he has been misled by other lawyers is an afterthought. 

JUDGEMENT:

    In view of the judgment passed today in connected Criminal Appeal No. 555 of 2010, this appeal is dismissed. However, the fine of Rs.20,000/- imposed on the appellant by the High Court by way of impugned judgment and order, is reduced to Rs.2,000/- and is directed to deposit the said fine forthwith.

     The appellant must surrender to serve out the sentence forthwith, failing which, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, would secure his custody and send him to jail to serve out the sentence. A copy of the order be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, for information and compliance.

Download