# getting the views of the officer whose proceedings have been examined by the Sessions

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 86/VIIg-2
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 2009-04-07
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 86/VIIg-2
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/getting-the-views-of-the-officer-whose-proceedings-have-been-examined-by-the-163643
- **Pages:** 3

## Text

374
 The provision in rule 100 : Chapter X of the General Rules (Criminal), 1957*, that
when a Sessions Judge on examining the record of any proceeding, thinks fit to report
the result of examination for the orders of the High Court, he should, except in a case in
which delay should be avoided, call for and submit with the report the explanation of the
officer whose proceedings have been examined by him, was made with the object of
getting the views of the officer whose proceedings have been examined by the Sessions
Judge as well. It is, however, impressed upon all District Magistrates and all Magistrates
in their districts that whenever they are called upon to give explanations as required by
the rules or by order of the High Court or the Sessions Judge, they have to carry out the
orders and whatever explanation they submit should be properly worded and should not
show either disrespect or discourtesy to any superior officer or court.
55. INITIATION OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
C.L. No. 86/VIIg-2 dated 7th September, 1953
Before making a recommendation for starting contempt proceedings a case
should be examined in the light of the principles affirmed by the Supreme Court in their
judgment in Brahma Prakash Sharma and others versus The State of Uttar Pradesh,
Criminal Appeal no. 24 of 1951, decided on 8th May, 1953 (1953 A.L.J.R., p. 571).
C.L. No. 40/VII c-25 dated 25th March, 1975
While making preliminary enquiries in contempt matters the statements of
alleged contemners and the witnesses must either be recorded on oath or taken on
affidavits.
C.L. No. 57/VIII e-c-167 dated 20th May, 1961
Whenever a report, regarding contempt of subordinate courts is made, it should
be accompanied by, as many copies of the report as there are parties against whom
proceedings are proposed to be initiated together with one extra copy.
C.L. No. 68/V110-25 dated 19th June, 1979
The Court has noticed that contempt references from the subordinate courts are
often received after the period of expiry of one year from the alleged date of contempt
with the result that the same are filed.
Attention of all the judicial officers including District Judges is invited to the
provisions of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 which provides that no
court shall initiate any proceedings for contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise,
after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to
have been committed.
Timely submissions of service reports in Contempt matters by the Chief Judicial
Magistrates.
C.L. No. 11/2009/IIIb-36/Admin ̳G', Dated: April 7, 2009

Taking serious view of the non submission of reports within stipulated time by the
Chief Judicial Magistrates in the matter of effecting service of summons in Contempt

* Note: Now 1977 Vide Notification No. 504/vb-13, dated 5.11.1983
375
Applications, the Hon'ble Court has desired that all the Chief Judicial Magistrates must
ensure that summons are duly served upon the alleged contemnor and compliance report
is sent to the Hon'ble Court on or before the date fixed in summons.

Therefore, in continuation of earlier Circular Letters (1. C.L. No. 109/VIIIC2/Admin. ̳G' dated 30.11.1990. 2 C.L. No. 19/Admin. ̳G' dated 3.2.191. 3. C.L. No.
23/06/Admin. ̳G' dated 29.5.2006), I have been directed to say that the Chief Judicial
Magistrates shall ensure service of summons in Contempt Applications well within
stipulated time.
I am further to request you to kindly bring the contents of this Circular letter to
the knowledge of all the Judicial Magistrates under your administrative control for strict
compliance.
Non-submission of Service Report in Contempt matters by the Chief Judicial
Magistrates.
C.L. No. 23/2006: Admin ̳G'. Dated: 29.5.2006

Hon'ble Court while dealing with Contempt Petition has noticed that the reports
with regard to the service of the summons are not being submitted by the Chief Judicial
Magistrates within time. As a result of which, the contempt matters cannot proceed get
delayed on account of the non-availability of the service report.

Therefore, while drawing attention of all concerned to Court's Circular letter No.
109/VIIC-2/Admin. ̳G' dated 30.11.1990 and Circular letter No. 19/Admin. ̳G' dated
3.2.1991; I am directed to request that the contents of and directions in the circulars
aforesaid, be unerringly gone through all the way for ensuring strict compliance by all
concerned especially the Chief Judicial Magistrate under your administrative control by
transmitting service reports within the time prescribed. Non-submission of service report
within time may be viewed seriously and action might be initiated against the defaulting
Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Service of process issued in contempt petitions and other cases.
C.L. No. 19/Admin./C/Sec. Dt. Allahabad, February 3, 1991.

I am directed to say that when contempt petitions and other cases are filed in this
Court, processes are sent to the districts for service. But it has been experienced that
either the processes are not returned by the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned or many
times reports received from the districts are found to be incorrect sometimes reports are
returned by the Chief Judicial Magistrates with a lot of delay either due to fault of their
own office or due to the lapse on the part of the police. In the above state of affairs, much
time of the court is wasted in join through the files and assigns orders, either to await or
search the process or issue reminder. To avoid above situation and loss of time and
restore the efficacy of the processes, the Court is of the view that the processes sent by
the Court are promptly entered in the relevant registers, maintained in the office of the
Chief Judicial Magistrates and sent to the police and returned to their own office ensured
at least one week before the date fixed and to dispatch the same promptly so as to reach
this Court before the due date.
376

I am, therefore, to request you kindly to direct that the Chief Judicial Magistrate
will peruse the register of the process of this Court maintained in his office on each
working day to ensure that no process is lying unattended or unreturned by the due date.
Service Report of notices sent to Chief Judicial Magistrates for service upon the
persons.
C.L.No. 109/VIIC-25, Admn. (G) Dated: Allahabad: November 30, 1994

I am directed to say that while exercising original jurisdiction on criminal
contempt and civil contempt this Court sends a motion of notice in contempt proceedings
for procuring the attendance of the contemnor. It has been observed by the Court that
whenever such notices are sent for service upon the persons concerned the court is not
obliged in the proceedings or the court.

I am, therefore, to say that whenever such notices are sent to the Chief Judicial
Magistrates of the Districts for service upon the persons concerned a report about the fate
of the same should invariably be transmitted to the Court indicating whether it has been
served or not, accepted or refused before the date of hearing of the case as mentioned in
the notices.

Kindly instruct the Chief Judicial Magistrate of your judgeship to ensure strict
compliance as above.
56. REVISIONS
G.L. No. 15/X dated 20th September, 1951
 Unless on a perusal of the judgment and the grounds of Criminal Revision filed
under section 435 (new section 397) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the Judge is
satisfied that notice should be issued, counsel for the applicant may be heard first. Notice
should be issued to State Counsel and the opposite parties (if any) if the court after
hearing counsel for the applicant is satisfied that there is prima facie some merit in the
application.
 These instructions do not fetter the discretion of Sessions Judges to dispose of any
revision application without hearing any party as provided under section 440 (new
section 403) of the Code of Criminal Procedure; and where an application appears to be
obviously frivolous or groundless there is no reason why a Sessions Judge may not, if he
thinks fit, reject it without even hearing counsel for the applicant.
C.L. No. 63/IV h-14 dated 12th June, 1979

Sessions Judges should see that criminal revisions are equally distributed for
hearing in the file of Sessions Judges and Additional Sessions Judges.
C.L. No. 6/VIII-188/Admn.(G) dated 24th January, 1989
The Court has noticed that piecemeal decisions are being given by the Sessions
Judges hearing criminal revisions against the one and the same order creating an
anomalous position.