‘Democratic fabric would suffer’: HC sends man to jail for 45 days for flouting court order

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has sentenced a man to 45-day imprisonment for committing contempt of court and said that the democratic fabric of society would suffer if respect for the judiciary is undermined.

Justice Subramonium Prasad also imposed a fine of Rs 2,000 on the contemnor who demolished a boundary wall which was built by the petitioner pursuant to a high court order.

“Keeping in view the contumacious conduct of the Respondent No.1/contemnor, this Court sentences the Respondent No.1/contemnor, who is present in Court today, to undergo 45 days of simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 2,000. The Respondent No.1/contemnor is directed to be taken in custody forthwith, said the court in its order dated May 13.

The contemnor tendered an unconditional apology to the court for his conduct while claiming that there is a dispute between him and the petitioner regarding the demarcation of their properties which are situated next to each other and, therefore, the demolition of the petitioner’s boundary wall was conducted because he was under the misconception that the wall had been constructed on his land.

Justice Prasad opined that the purpose of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of the courts of law and court orders cannot be flouted by using strong arm tactics.

The judge observed that the action was not in the heat of the moment and can only be construed as an attempt to willfully flout the orders passed by the court and deserves no mercy.

“The manner in which the demolition took place, i.e. by using a JCB excavator and with the aid of other people, also indicate that the Respondent No.1/contemnor harboured the intention to terrorise the petitioner. This demonstrates that the Respondent No.1/contemnor possess scant regard towards the orders of the Court, and has undermined the dignity of the Court and outraged the majesty of law, the court said.

“The purpose of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of the courts of law, since the respect and authority commanded by the courts of law are the greatest guarantee to an ordinary citizen and the democratic fabric of society will suffer if respect for the judiciary is undermined. For the acts done by the Respondent No.1/contemnor, he deserves no mercy from this Court. A strong message has to be sent to the society that the orders of the Court cannot be flouted by using strong arm tactics, it added.