08 , 1988 CriLJ1745 , 1988 INSC 108 , JT1988 (2 )SC 102 , 1988 ( )MPJR(SC)85 , 1988 (1 )SCALE728 , (1988 )3 SCC167 , [1988 ]3 SCR547 , ,MANU/SC/0362/1988
S. Ranganathan#Sabyasachi Mukherjee#2137SC2140Judgment/OrderAIR#CriLJ#INSC#JT#MANU#MPJR#SCALE#SCC#SCRSabyasachi Mukherjee,S. Ranganathan,SUPREME COURT OF INDIAAction For Contempt#Administration Of Justice#Allegation Of Bias#Amicus Curiae#Appeal#Apprehension#Cause Of Action#Civil Contempt#Constitution of India#Contemner#Contempt#Contempt Application#Contempt Committed#Contempt of Court#Contempt Petition#Contempt Power#Contempt Proceeding#Conviction#Conviction For Contempt#Court of Justice#Criminal Contempt#Criticism#Criticism Of Judgment#Discovery#Doctrine of Necessity#Due Course Of Justice#Duty#Editor#Expression Of Opinion#Fair Comment#Form Of Notice#Freedom#Fundamental Right#Guilty Of Contempt#Information#Instrument Of Oppression#Intention#Interference#Judicial Proceeding#Libel#Limitation#Material Fact#Newspaper#Not A Cloistered Virtue#Oath#Obstruction#Omission#Opportunity#Power To Punish#Privilege#Proceeding#Proceeding For Contempt#Public Document#Public Interest#Publication#Punish For Contempt#Reasonable Criticism#Record#Refusing#Scurrilous Attack#Suo Motu Action#Suspicion2012-9-24Protection of Certain rights Regarding Freedom of Speech, etc.,Right to Freedom,Fundamental Rights,Constitution of India56081,16932,56068,16916,17051,17151,56080,56069,16994,17068,56089,17071 -->
MANU/SC/0362/1988
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Misc. Petition No. 260 of 1988
Decided On: 15.04.1988
Appellants: P.N. Dua Vs. Respondent: P. Shiv Shanker and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S. Ranganathan and Sabyasachi Mukherjee JUDGMENT
Sabyasachi Mukherjee, J.
1. By an order dated 15th March, 1988 we declined in this matter to initiate contempt proceedings under Section 15(1)(a) and (b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter called 'the Act') read with Rule 3(a)(b) and (c) of the Supreme Court Contempt of Court Rules, 1975. We also on that date disposed of the application for intervention filed by Shri R.N. Trivedi. We stated that we will indicate our reasons by a separate judgment. We do so herein.
2. Shri P. Shiv Shankar who at the relevant time was the Hon'ble Minister for Law, Justice and Company Affairs delivered a speech before a meeting of the Bar Council of Hyderabad on 28th November, 1987. Shri P.N. Duda, who is an advocate practising in the Supreme Court, has drawn our attention to that speech. According to him, by that speech respondent No. 1, Shri P. Shiv Shankar has made statements against the Supreme Court which are derogatory to the dignity of this Court, attributing this Court with partiality towards economically affluent Sections of the people and has used language which is extremely intemperate, undignified, and unbecoming of a person of his stature and position. It was stated that Shri P. Shiv Shankar formerly held the office of a Judge of the High Court before he resigned and took to politics.
3. We have read the entire speech. It is not necessary to set out the entire speech. The relevant portions of the said speech for the present purpose are as follows:
(a) The Supreme Court composed of the element from the elite class had their unconcealed sympathy for the haves i.e. the Zamindars. As a result, they interpreted the word 'compensation' in Article 31 contrary to the spirit and the intendment of the Constitution and ruled the compensation must represent the price which a willing seller is prepared to accept from a willing buyer. The entire programme of