Contempt Case: DC Ganderbal Appears Before J&K HC

(MENAFN- Kashmir Observer) Srinagar- Underlining that it wants to decide the matter“one way or the other” as expeditiously as possible, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Monday asked Deputy Commissioner Ganderbal to“strictly” file reply by August 12 to contempt proceedings initiated against him following a reference by Chief Judicial Magistrat(CJM) of the central Kashmir district.

Pursuant to the court's August 2, Deputy Commissioner, Ganderbal Shyambir appeared in person before the Court's division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Sanjeev Kumar and was subsequently apprised about the reference by the CJM, Ganderbal and the charge leveled against him.

To this, the Deputy Commissioner replied that he has not done it intentionally to“demean” the Court.

“Office is requested to forward the reference made by the learned Judge of the District Judiciary, Ganderbal to the Deputy Commissioner, Ganderbal today itself in order to give him an opportunity to file his reply to the said charge leveled against him by the learned CJM, Ganderbal,” the division bench said, adding,“He is expected to file his response on or before the next date of hearing.”

On account of the nature of the case, the court underlined that it would like to decide this matter one way or the other as expeditiously as possible and“no further time shall be given to the contemnor (DC Ganderbal) to file his response). Subsequently, the court ordered the listing of the case on August 12.

“On the next date of hearing, Mr. Shyambir, Deputy Commissioner, Ganderbal shall remain personally present,” the court added.

Last month, a court in Ganderbal issued show-cause notice to Deputy Commissioner Shyambir as to why a reference be not made to the High Court of J&K and Ladakh for initiating contempt proceedings against him in terms of Contempt of Courts Act.

The court, Sub-judge Ganderbal, passed the order against the Deputy Commissioner for allegedly not complying with its order in a civil suit and attempting to“personally attack” him“by manipulation and fabrication”.

Subsequently, the CJM court made reference under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act 2015 in Criminal Reference against Shyambir and issued notice to him for his appearance today.

Last month, the court of Sub-Judge Ganderbal noted that a preliminary enquiry was initiated against the contemnor Mr Shyambir and in the first instance, he was asked to a show-cause as to why a reference be not made to High Court of J&K and Ladakh for initiating contempt proceedings in terms of Contempt of Courts Act.

The sub judge has also accused Shymabir of launching an inquiry into land owned by him as“revenge” for the order regarding a land acquisition matter, in which the petitioners (two locals of the Ganderbal district) approached the court saying they were not compensated by the government after it acquired land from them, even though a decree in this regard was issued in their favour in 2022.

In January this year, the court had directed the Deputy Commissioner to compensate the petitioners. In an order dated June 21, the court said that the DC had not acted on the January order, and directed that his and other officials' salaries be withheld.

In the latest order, issued on July 23, the court said that his previous order“didn't go well with Deputy Commissioner Ganderbal, namely Mr Shyambir, who attempted to personally attack the Presiding Officer (the sub-judge) by scandalising him and weakening him by manipulation and fabrication, and for this purpose, he called a meeting immediately after the order and conspired with some other officers/officials of the district to implicate the Presiding Officer of the court for passing a lawful order against the judgment-debtors”.

The court accused Shyambir of launching a vindictive investigation to“implicate” him in a false case.“Out of the steps decided to be taken by the contemnor Deputy Commissioner against the Presiding Officer, one step was to frame the Presiding Officer in any fabricated incident, and if this is not possible, to trace out if there is any property in the name of the judge anywhere,” the July 23 order said.

The court said DC Shyambir found out that he had two kanals of land in Ganderbal, and that the DC“misused his official machinery and devoted time in tracing out the documents of the property, which the Presiding Officer lawfully holds”. After this,“as a first attack” on the judge, the sub-Judge said a patwari visited his land thrice under the DC's direction. He said the patwari told the caretaker of the land that the DC Shyambir had constituted“a team for demarcation of the land of the judge” as the judge had“passed the order against the Deputy Commissioner and other higher officers”.

“The committee constituted for demarcation is clear abuse of the official position as neither the Presiding Officer moved any application for demarcation nor any notice was ever given to the presiding officer for any intended so-called demarcation of land in his possession for the last more than 15 years,” the court had noted.

In fact, the court said, there does not exist any dispute at all regarding the land.“The Committee was called to submit a report within two days and most of the members of the committee are from different jurisdictions having no authority to demarcate the land outside their jurisdiction.”

In fact, the court said, this committee was constituted by DC to“manipulate the spot position to demonstrate the land purchased and in possession of the Presiding officer (judge) as Khascharai, against the recorded and settled spot position.” The committee has been constituted by the Deputy Commissioner-Shyambir with oblique and malafide motives and evil intention in reaction to a lawful order passed by the Presiding Officer, the court said.

“Till the time order was passed, there was no problem with the contemnor as regards the land of the Presiding Officer but after passing of the judicial order in execution petition, the contemnor started misusing his position rendering him liable not only for contempt but criminal proceedings under Prevention of Corruption Act for abuse of the official position for ulterior motives.”

The order also said that as the DC may“try to implicate the judge in some false and frivolous”, he has been issued a notice to explain why he should not be referred to the High Court for criminal contempt.

“Such an act on the part of the Deputy Commissioner/Contemnor, on the face of it, amounts to criminal contempt as the same is aimed at scandalizing the Judge who passed a judicial order and it has the potential to lower down the authority of this court as the Deputy Commissioner, by abuse of official position, wants to demonstrate the mighty powers he enjoys to lower the authority of the Court,” the court said, adding,“Therefore, in the larger interest of the institution and to maintain the public trust, faith and confidence of the people in the independence and sanctity of the judicial institution, this court deems it appropriate to proceed in accordance with The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”

MENAFN05082024000215011059ID1108520315