Case Judgement Analysis: Bal Kishan Giri v. State of UP, AIR 2014 SC (Supp) 469

1) Citation:

• Bal Kishan Giri vs. State of U.P.
• Criminal Appeal No. 555 of 2010
• Date of Judgment: May 28, 2014

2) Facts of the Case:

An FIR was lodged regarding the disappearance and murder of individuals. During the investigation, the appellant filed an application alleging that the accused had criminal connections and links to judges of the High Court, insinuating that these connections might affect the proceedings. The High Court issued a show-cause notice to the appellant for contempt of court for these allegations.

3) Issues Involved:

1. Whether the allegations made by the appellant against the judges and accused constituted contempt of court?
2. Whether the apology tendered by the appellant was genuine and should be accepted by the court?

4) Arguments:

The appellant's lawyer argued that the show cause notice was not in compliance with the rules of the High Court, and thus, all subsequent proceedings were vitiated. Additionally, the appellant, who was under mental tension due to his nephew's murder and misguided by advocates, had submitted the complaint.

The State, on the other hand, argued that the serious and unsubstantiated allegations made by the appellant against the judges amounted to criminal contempt. The appellant had submitted the complaint, admitted to its contents, and filed a reply to the show cause notice, which negated the impact of any violation of rules.

5) Decision of the Court:

1. The High Court's judgment and order were upheld, and the fine of Rs.20,000 imposed on the appellant was reduced to Rs.2,000. The appellant was directed to deposit the fine forthwith.
2. The appeal was dismissed.

6) Ratio of the Case:

The case reaffirms the principle that contempt of court allegations should not be made lightly. The court emphasized the importance of not undermining the majesty of law and the dignity of the court, particularly when dealing with judges, and cautioned against casting unsubstantiated aspersions against the judiciary.

7) Comment on the Decision:

The court's decision emphasizes the importance of not making serious and baseless allegations against judges and court officials. Contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated lightly, but genuine contemptuous actions should be appropriately addressed. The court also highlighted the significance of a sincere and unconditional apology in such cases.