Contempt petition against Basant Rath dismissed

The court had issued a notice to Rath as IGP traffic on 20 May, asking him to explain why contempt proceedings shall not be initiated against him in a case filed by the owner of Jahangir Hotel.

MUDASIR YAQOOB
Srinagar, Publish Date: Nov 17 2018 12:22AM | Updated Date: Nov 17 2018 12:22AM
Contempt petition against Basant Rath dismissedFile Photo

A contempt of court petition filed by an hotelier against the recently transferred traffic police chief Basant Rath was dismissed Friday here, declaring it devoid of any merit. 

The petition was heard in the court of municipal magistrate Srinagar, YP Sharma who decreed that “proceedings against Basant Rath are ordered to be closed/dropped being not maintainable.”

The court had issued a notice to Rath as IGP traffic on 20 May, asking him to explain why contempt proceedings shall not be initiated against him in a case filed by the owner of Jahangir Hotel.

The complainant had sought punishment to Rath and others under provisions of contempt of court laws for allegedly violating a stay order in his favour and damaging the property at Jahangir Chowk.

The court said Rath was not a party in the main suit observing he was doing his lawful duty in removing an obstruction for the vehicular movement while complying direction of the High Court, said his lawyer Mir Naveed Gul, referring to the arguments submitted by standing counsel for police headquarters and home department.

The court also said Rath was not at all aware about the ex-parte interim order of the court nor any such order was ever served upon him by the petitioner (hotelier). “Counsel for the applicant (hotelier) could not show any law to the contrary holding therein that even if the person is not a party to the suit he would still be liable to be proceeded for breach of ex-parte interim order of the court,” the court noted. 

“Moreover it is a simpliciter suit for injunction and any order passed therein could bind the parries to the suit only.” Earlier, referring to various provisions of the law, advocate Gul pleaded that the stay order was issued “in personam.” “In a lawsuit in which the case is against a specific individual, that person must be served with a summons and complaint, to give the court jurisdiction to try the case, and the judgment applies to that person and is called as in personam judgment,” Gul pleaded before court. “Grounds taken by petitioner in his petition are devoid of any merit. The complaint is false, frivolous and bogus and devoid of any merit. The application is not maintainable either in law or on facts,” Gul submitted.

x
This site uses cookies to deliver our services and to show you relevant news and ads. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service.That's Fine