AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS.versusK. K. MOHAN
- Citation
- 2018 INSC 98
- Decided
- 5 February 2018
- Disposal
- Dismissed
- Bench
- R K AGRAWAL
Holding
The Court held that the Bar Council of India's finalized election schedule was just and proper and no case of willful disobedience existed, so contempt proceedings could not be initiated.
Summary
The petitioners, Ajayinder Sangwan and others, filed a contempt petition under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging that the Bar Council of India (BCI) willfully disobeyed Supreme Court orders dated 14 December 2017, 23 August 2017 and 24 November 2017 concerning the election schedule for State Bar Councils. The Court examined the BCI's application dated 23 January 2018, which showed that the BCI had finalized the election schedule. The Court held that the schedule was "just and proper" and that no willful disobedience could be established. Consequently, the Court found no basis to initiate contempt proceedings against the BCI. The contempt petition was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Bar Council of India willfully disobeyed the Supreme Court's orders regarding the election schedule for State Bar Councils.
- Whether the circumstances disclosed amount to contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
- Whether the election schedule finalized by the BCI is just and proper.
Legislation cited
Subjects
Judgment
600 [2018]REPORTS
SUPREME COURT 1 S.C.R. 600 [2018] 1 S.C.R.
A AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS.
v.
K. K. MOHAN
(Contempt Petition (C) No. 565 of 2018)
B In
(Transferred Case (Civil) No. 126 of 2015)
FEBRUARY 05, 2018
[R. K. AGRAWAL AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.]
C
Advocates – State Bar Councils – Elections – Application
seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against Bar Council of
India (BCI) for alleged willful disobedience of orders passed by
Supreme Court – Held: BCI has finalized the schedule for election
in respective State Bar Councils – Election schedule as finalized is
D just and proper – No case is made out to initiate contempt proceeding
against BCI – Contempt petition is dismissed – Contempt of Courts
Act, 1971.
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Contempt Petition (Civil)
No. 565 of 2018 in Transferred Case (Civil) No. 126 of 2015.
E Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India.
Vikramjeet Banerjee, Rajiv Dutta, Manan Kumar Misra, Mahabir
Singh, V. S. Giri, Sr. Advs, Ramesh Babu M. R., Anantha Narayana
M.G., Gaurav Agarwal, S. Moh. Haneef, Piyush Choudhary, Satya Mitra,
J. S. Rawat, Ghanshyam Joshi, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Tanuj Agarwal (For
F M/S. Parekh & Co.), Ajainder Sangwan, Vivek Narayan Sharma,
Siddharth Mahajan, Raj Kumar Sharma, S. N. Sharma, S. K. Sharma,
Deepak Sehrawat, Tarunesh Kumar, Arun Rathi, C. P. Singh, Sanjay
Singh, Shubham Awasthi, Ms. Sweety Chattopadhyay, Rohan Sharma,
Ms. Rishina Parashar, Irfan Firdous, Kunal Chopra, Anirudh Kumar,
G V. P. Singh, Narendra Singh, Dhan Singh, Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Sriram
P., Ms. Khushbu Jain, Vishnu Shankar M.S., Ms. Athira G.Nair, Ankur
S. Kulkarni, Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Ms. Taruna Ardhendumauli
Prasad, Nirmal Kumar Ambastha, Namit Saxena, Ms. Anjul Dwivedi,
Ms. Gunwant Dara, Rajesh Ranjan, M. K .Maroria, Mrs. Sarla Chandra,
Sachin Patil, Praveen Agrawal, Gagan Gupta, H. Chandra Sekhar,
H
600
AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS. v. K. K. MOHAN 601
Ashwani Kumar Dubey, Sanjeev Kr. Baliyan, Purvish Jitendra Malkan, A
Ms. Dharita Malkan, Ms. Deepa Gorasia, Bhaskar Singh, Ms. Madhusmita
Bora, Venkateswara Rao Anumolu, Mrs. Nandini Gore, Parmanand
Pandey, Sudarshan Singh Rawat, Ms. Poli Kataki, R. Balasubramanian,
Gaurav Sharma, Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Dhawal Mohan, Prateek Bhatia,
Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Ms. K. V. Bharathi Upadhyaya, M. Shoeb
B
Alam, Ms. Fauzia Shakil, Ujjwal Singh, Mojahid Karim Khan, Mohinder
Jit Singh, Prang Newmai, Ms. Slomita Rai, E. C. Agrawala, Himinder
Lal, Shibashish Misra, Mritunjay Kumar Sinha, Subhasish Mohanty,
Mohammed Sadique T.A., Amol B. Karande, Vijay Kumar, Gopal Prasad,
Anupam Lal Das, M/S. Venkat Palwai Law Associates, Ms. Sneha Kalita,
Vikas Upadhyay, Vidit Monga, Ms. Aparna Jha, Dr. Kailash Chand, C
Jogy Scaria, Ms. Beena Victor, Rakesh K. Sharma, S. S. Shamshery,
Amit Sharma, Ankit Raj, Ms. Indira Bhakar, Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Vipin
Kumar, Baldev Atreya, Deepak Goel, Kamal Kumar Pandey, Aditya
Singh, Pijush K. Roy, Ms. Kakali Roy, Rajan K. Chourasia, Ms. Lalita
Kohli, Abhishek Swarup (For M/S. Manoj Swarup and Co.), Dr. Manish
D
Singhvi, Shailja Nanda Mishra, Satyendra Kumar (For Irshad Ahmad),
Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Ms. Radhika Chaturvedi, Hitesh Kumar
Sharma, S. K. Rajora (For Ms. Manju Jetley), Mrs. Santosh Singh,
Ms. Malini Poduval, Anurag Dubey, Ajit Kumar Pathak, Sanchit
Maheshwari, S. R. Setia, Ms. Kamakshi S. Mehlwal, Y. Raja Gopala
Rao, Kunal Chatterji, Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Rajeev Singh, Anjani E
Kumar Mishra, Ms. Christi Jain, Harvinder Chowdhury, M/S. Lemax
Lawyers & Co., Vishal Khattar, Ms. C. Rubavathi, M. A. Chinnasamy,
K. Ethiraj, P. V. Dinesh, A. V. Rangam, Buddy A. Ranganadhan, Sunil
Fernandes, Ms. Nupur Kumar, Harsh V. Surana, Gaurav Agarwal, Kunal
Singh, Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Ms. Rahat Sharma, Shishir Pinaki,
F
Rajiv Kumar Sinha, Sumi P. S., Vibhakar Mishra, K. K. Gautam, Umesh
P. Wadhwani, Deependra Kumar Pathak, Nischal Kumar Neeraj,
Suvendu Suvasis Dash, K. V. Mohan, Atul Jha, Sandeep Jha,
Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Advs. with them for the appearing parties.
The Order of the Court was delivered by
G
R. K. AGRAWAL, J. 1. This petition has been filed by the present
applicants seeking initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts
Act 1971, for alleged willful disobedience of this Court’s order dated
14.12.2017 along with orders dated 23.08.2017 and 24.11.2017 passed
in Transferred Case (C) No. 126 of 2015.
H
602 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 1 S.C.R.
A 2. In the application for directions filed on behalf of the Bar Council
of India (BCI) on 23.01.2018, we find that the BCI has finalized the
schedule for election in respective State Bar Councils. Further, we are
of the opinion that the election schedule as finalized by the BCI is just
and proper.
B 3. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that no
case has been made out to initiate contempt proceeding against the BCI.
The contempt petition is hereby dismissed.
Divya Pandey Contempt petition dismissed.
C
D
E
F
G
H
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.