Sham Shakar Pevekar v. Shriniwas Sridhar And ORS

criconp-15.13 pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.15 OF 2013 Sham Shankar Pevekar ... Petitioner

Versus

Shriniwas Shridhar and Ors.

... Respondents None for the Petitioner.

Dr. F.R. Shaikh, APP for the Respondent - State. CORAM : A.S. OKA & P. D. NAIK, JJ.

DATE : 18th MARCH, 2016 P.C.

None appears for the Petitioner. The Petition is listed on board as the Petitioner has not removed office objections. One of the office objections is that though the Petitioner is seeking relief of initiating action for committing criminal contempt against the concerned Respondents, the consent of the Advocate General is not filed on record. There are various objections including the objection regarding non-filing of the second set. We have perused the averments made in the Contempt Petition. The only material averment regarding contempt is in paragraph 16 which reads thus :- "16. The Petitioner state that the Respondent had approached the Bombay High Court through Criminal

criconp-15.13 Application No.2076 of 2010 and 2627 of 2010 for quashing the said F.I.R. The Respondent have misguided the Court by concealing and hiding the material facts before the Hon'ble High Court. Therefore the Hon'ble High Court granted the interim relief to the Respondent for 'not taking coercive action against the Respondent by the Investigating Authority. The Respondent have hidden the material facts and misguided the Hon'ble Court regarding 'sanction of 11 loans for construction of flats which had been purchased by the Petitioner in his name and in the name of his wholly dependent mother along with others as joint owner'. Therefore, this order is passed by the Hon'ble High Court. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit 'F' is the copy of the Order dated 18th January, 2011 passed by the Hon'ble High Court." 2.

There is not even a prima facie material to substantiate the allegations. By no stretch of imagination, these bald allegations constitute a criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Hence, we decline to entertain this Petition and the same is rejected. (P. D. NAIK, J ) (A.S. OKA, J )