Dushmanta Banerjee v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

298 10.12.2025 NB Ct. 28 WPCRC 185 of 2025 In WPA 14510 of 2024 Dushmanta Banerjee Vs.

Sri Hridyesh Mohan, IAS & Ors.

Ms. Debjani Sengupta, Mr. Abhijit Chatterjee, Ms. Shahima Haque.

...for the petitioner.

Ms. Sonal Sinha, Mr. Amritlal Chatterjee, Mr. Sandipan Das.

...for the contemnors.

The alleged contemnors are present in Court.

Affidavit of compliance filed on behalf of the alleged contemnor nos.3 and 4 are taken on record.

Copy of the same is supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the order passed by this Court has been complied with only after issuance of Rule.

Heard the learned counsel for the alleged contemnors. The alleged contemnors have tried to explain the reason for the delay in complying with the order in their own way. It has also been contended on behalf of the alleged contemnors that there was no willful or deliberate attempt to violate the Court's order and all endeavour was made to comply with the order. The need to obtain financial concurrence has been alluded to.

Although such reason may not be acceptable, the fact is that the order passed by this Court has now been complied with.

The prime purpose of taking action in the contempt jurisdiction is to secure compliance of the order passed by the Court.

It appears that the order passed by this court has been complied with.

In view of the fact that the order passed by this Court has actually been complied with, no further order need be passed on this application.

The appearance of the alleged contemnors is noted and is dispensed with. The Rule is discharged The application for contempt is accordingly disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for. (Jay Sengupta, J.)