Justice Dipankar Datta was born on 09-02-1965 in a Bengali family. He served as a Judge in Calcutta High Court, and as Chief Justice of Bombay High Court, then he was sworn in as Supreme Court Judge on 12-12-2022 by Dr Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, the Chief Justice of India.
The plaintiff allegedly expressed dissatisfaction with the sequence of items taken up, questioning why Item No. 11 was addressed before Item No. 10 and used offensive language, denigrating the court’s proceedings.
“Prima facie, even before the registration of contempt case against the Vice Chancellor of Himachal Pradesh, National Law University, Single Judge could not have given a finding that she had committed wilful disobedience of the Court’s order.”
“It is incumbent upon the Courts of justice to check such actions with a firm hand which otherwise will have pernicious consequences.”
The contemnors apologised and stated that the entire incident is quite unfortunate and though facts have been misrepresented before the instant Court, however, they do not intend to disobey the orders of the Court and that the respondents have great respect for the Court.
“Court proceedings are formal proceedings which must be allowed to be conducted in a dignified manner without undue disruptions”
“Respondent has used utter derogatory language for the Single Judge bench to the extent of saying that the Single Judge is a ‘thief’ and he has full proof of the same.”
“Exemplary costs need to be imposed so that no one could dare to take the Courts for a ride.”
Calcutta High Court issue the ‘Rule NISI’ for non-compliance with Court orders to deploy central forces for election security during West Bengal Panchayat Election 2023.
“Politicians play an influential role in the life of a common man. The words and actions of a politician has an impact on his followers, party men and public at large. It is imperative that this power is not to be misused for illegal and personal gains”
The Supreme Court strongly criticised litigants who use ‘apology’ as a ‘potent weapon’ to evade punishment and expressed concern over the trend of courts showing excessive leniency towards those held in contempt.
“Plantation of trees is one such exercise which this Court would consider for countenancing contemnors’ act of contempt, because trees, for as long as they are alive, be it for decades or for centuries, would incessantly and silently provide multiple benefits to the people.”
“The parties seeking divorce by mutual consent shall not be compelled to furnish or withdraw their consent for a decree of dissolution of marriage since the key and chief component for such a decree is free and unblemished consent.”
The Calcutta High Court had upheld the suspension of the licence of a medical practitioner who was found guilty of contempt of Court.
Supreme Court said that it will take recourse to the coercive arm of law, if any such incident occurs in the future. Also warned that there shall be no impediment in the work of legal defense counsel.
The Court directed the SHO, Tilak Marg to issue warrants of arrest against Veer Singh and shall also get the Look Out circular issued against him as he was not willing to comply with the orders of this Court.
As a Court of record, the High Court is attributed only with the power to punish for its contempt and the contempt of Courts Subordinate to it and not the Court which is superior to it.
Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that to avoid any undue disposal of the proceedings pending before the Revenue Courts wherein the intention of a party in possession of the land is to delay the proceedings, issuance of specific guidelines is necessary.
Two PWD officials were sentenced under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to undergo simple imprisonment for four months and two months respectively, along with fine of Rs. 2000 each as they wilfully disobeyed the directions and orders passed by the Delhi High Court and of the NGT, in relation to protection of trees.
The contempt petition against the US resident was outcome of matrimonial dispute as he had committed breach of settlement orders and showed scant respect for the Court by defying the orders of the Court.