Law: Contempt of Court Act, 1976

Section: 3,4

Law: Sindh Foodgrains (Licensing Control) Order, 1957

Section: 10

(a) Contempt of Court Act (LXIV of 1976)--- ----Ss. 3 & 4---Contempt proceedings ---Contemner, a Government official--­Appearance through State Counsel ---Contemner had not engaged any counsel but was represented by the State Counsel---Validity---Representation by the State Counsel in contempt proceedings was not permissible under law. (b) Contempt of Court Act (LXIV of 1976)--- ----Ss. 3 & 4---Sindh Food grains (Licensing Control) Order, 1957, cl.(10)--­Contempt proceedings---Cancellation of food grains licence---Plea raised by the petitioner was that the licence was cancelled in derogation of the order passed by High Court in Constitutional petition---Validity---Petitioners were found guilty of contravention of Foodgrains (Licensing Control) Order, 1957 for non-submission of the paid-up electricity bills and also for misusing Government subsidized wheat---Notices in that regard were issued to the petitioners who did not furnish the required explanation within stipulated time and also failed to appear before the Authority, though opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to them---Where the petitioners were found guilty of contravention of cl.(10) of Sindh Foodgrains (Licensing Control) Order, 1957, licences of the petitioners were rightly cancelled and contempt application against the alleged contemner who was Rationing Controller and Licensing Authority was dismissed with costs. (c) Contempt of Court-- ---- Committal for contempt of Court is a weapon which is to be used sparingly and always with reference to administration of justice where ex facie some contempt of Court has been committed. Re. Ramsay LR 3 PC 427; Amulya Ratan v. Amulya Chandra 32 CWN 1242; K.M. Bison v. A.H. Skone 88 IC 725 and Tarit Kanti Biswas AIR 1918 Cal. 988 ref. (d) Contempt of Court Act (LXIV of 1976)--- ----Ss. 3 & 4---Contempt proceedings---Scope---No bar exists in moving the Court in order to bring a case of contempt of Court to the notice of the Court for taking action against an alleged contemner or contemners, such rights, however, cannot be misused with malicious intention to cause harassment to others. Tarfatullah v. S.N: Maitra AIR 1952 Cal. 919 ref. ORDER…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492