The Patna High Court Rohtas contempt case has come under scrutiny after a division bench sought all records relating to proceedings initiated against a former Rohtas district police chief over alleged non-compliance with a trial court’s directions.
The bench, comprising Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Sunil Dutta Mishra, described the situation as “peculiar” and “unprecedented” in an order issued on Thursday.
The High Court noted that the trial court’s 2023 judgment and its direction to register a first information report (FIR) against a person for allegedly giving false evidence were already under challenge before it.
The bench observed that procedural propriety should have been maintained by the lower court but said it would refrain from making further observations at this stage.
Trial Court Initiated Contempt Proceedings
Bihar Advocate General S D Sanjay told the High Court that the trial court had directed the then Rohtas superintendent of police to register an FIR against a man accused of giving a false statement.
According to the state’s submission, the trial court subsequently initiated criminal contempt proceedings against the former police chief and imposed a fine over alleged non-compliance with its directions.
The Advocate General argued that statutory provisions did not permit a court to directly order an FIR for false evidence in the circumstances described. Instead, he submitted, the court could file a formal written complaint.
He also contended that the trial court continued issuing orders even after its original judgment had been challenged before the High Court.
High Court Seeks Records, Stays Further Action
The division bench directed the principal district judge of Rohtas to submit a report along with all documents and orders relating to the contempt proceedings.
The High Court also agreed to an early hearing, directing that the appeal be listed among the first five cases on November 25.
The bench said the trial court’s directions and related issues would be examined at the final hearing. In the meantime, it ordered that no further action be taken and that the matter should not be precipitated.
The next hearing is expected to address the procedural questions surrounding the trial court’s directions and the subsequent contempt proceedings.
Conversation
Be kind and stay on topic. Comments are moderated; abuse, spam and personal attacks are removed. Report a problem