Mrs. Minakshi Hiraman Nandre v. State Of Maharashtra, Through Its Secretary And ORS

06.ASCP318.14.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 318 OF 2014 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 11874 OF 2012 Mrs. Minakshi Hiraman Nandre ... Petitioner Vs 1 State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents Ms. Kumud Bhatia for the Petitioner.

Mrs. R.A. Salunkhe, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 - State. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & R.I. CHAGLA, JJ.

TUESDAY, 04TH FEBRUARY, 2020 P.C. :

Having heard Ms. Bhatia, we do not think that a case of civil contempt is made out simply because an earlier petition was filed alleging civil contempt.

The second contempt petition would not lie merely because a fresh petition was filed after the writ petition in which the order of which contempt is complained of has been passed. We do not think that contempt petition can be used to derive SRP 1/2

06.ASCP318.14.doc substantive benefits. Neither can we add to nor we can take away from the order of which contempt is complained of. The order, read as it is, does not issue any command to grant any relief in favour of the petitioner.

This civil contempt petition is, therefore, entirely misconceived and is dismissed.

R.I. CHAGLA, J.

S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

SRP 2/2