Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
REPORTABLE
IN
Versus
JUDGMENT
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.
Page1
2
Page2
3
counsel also pointed out that the burden to prove the knowledge
the orders passed by this Court and he has not violated any order
passed by this court. Further, it was also pointed out that even
Page3
4
Page4
5
also referred to Section 2(c)(iii) of the Act and submitted that the
further submitted that this Court under Article 129 read with
Article 142 of the Constitution has the power to see that the
Page5
6
and the Officers, who are entrusted with the task be not
contempt petition has been preferred, was filed under Article 136
Page6
7
investigate the role played by A. Raja, the then Union Minister for
Before this Court, it was pointed out that the CBI had lodged a
Page7
8
directions:
Page8
9
Page9
10
Spectrum Scam no court shall pass any order which may, in any
Page10
11
in terms of Section 3(1) the PC Act, 1988 and Section 43(1) of the
March, 2011.
Page11
12
Page12
13
Page13
14
stated as under:
Page14
15
Page15
16
Page16
17
Page17
18
Page18
19
Page19
20
17. We are of the view that if the allegations raised against the
Crores under the FEMA, 1999 and is also in the process of issuing
Page20
21
have the freedom to carry on his duty entrusted, without any fear
follows:
20. We are of the view that the Courts, if they are to serve the
said, is only one of the many ways in which the due process of
Page21
22
punish any person for contempt of court and for that purpose it
follows:
Page22
23
Singh and another (1994) Suppl. (1) SCC 718 has delineated
the plenary powers of this Court and stated that the power
Court Act, 1971, read with Article 145 of the Constitution of India.
Page23
24
22. We are of the view that, assuming, there has not been any
justice in any cause or matter pending before it. The said Article
Page24
25
(P) Ltd. and another (1996) 4 SCC 622, this Court has held that
the very fact that the power is conferred only upon the Supreme
statutory provision.
25. We may indicate that the petitioner has inter alia invoked
Page25
26
and it is the duty and obligation of this Court to see, rather than
protect the reputation of the legal system, its components and its
a casualty.
Page26
27
26. We are, therefore, of the view that the petition filed under
J.
(G.S. Singhvi)
J.
(K.S. Radhakrishnan)
New Delhi,
December 9, 2013.
Page27