State Bank Of India And ANR v. Dr. Preeti Goyal
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI SPECIAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT 08 28.01.2025 b.r. Ct. no.2 CPAN 56 OF 2024 in WPA 531 OF 2023 ------------- State Bank of India, Stressed Asset Recovery Branch Siliguri, represented by the Authorised Officer & Anr.
Vs.
Dr. Preeti Goyal, District Magistrate, Darjeeling Mr. Milindo Paul Mr. Nabankar Paul Ms. Sutapa Sen Paul Ms. Bedashruti Bose Mr. Subham Das Mr. Bodhisatya Ghosh.
...For the Petitioners This is a contempt proceeding arising from an order dated April 5, 2023 passed by this Court.
None appears for the alleged contemnor.
On the prayer of Mr. Nabankur Paul, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners, leave is granted to the petitioners to file a supplementary affidavit disclosing the reasoned order passed by the alleged contemnor dated December 6, 2024, annexure-E at Page-9 to the supplementary affidavit.
The supplementary affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.
Contempt is a quasi criminal proceeding. The punishment for contempt is either on simple imprisonment or with fine or both. Therefore, the jurisdiction of contempt cannot be and should not be exercised loosely, The reasoned order passed by the alleged contemnor pursuant to the direction of this Court shows that after granting an opportunity of hearing, the reasoned order was passed. The reasoned order may be correct may be wrong in law but the correctness or quality of the reasoned order cannot be assessed by a Court in exercising its contempt jurisdiction. In a contempt proceeding, if there is any willful or deliberate violation of the direction of the Court, the same can be taken note of.
The understanding, application of law or the quality of the impugned order in the light of the prevailing law, cannot be gone into by a Court in exercise of its contempt jurisdiction.
In view of the above, this Court is satisfied that the direction of this Court dated April 5, 2023 has been complied with and there has been no deliberate or willful violation of the order on the part of the alleged contemnor.
In the event, the petitioners are aggrieved with the legality or correctness of the order passed by the alleged contemnor, the petitioners shall be at liberty to
take recourse to law in accordance with law by challenging the same.
In view of the above, this Contempt Proceeding, CPAN 56 of 2024 stands dropped and closed.
Accordingly, CPAN 56 of 2024 stands disposed of, without any order as to costs.
(Aniruddha Roy, J.)