RAM NIRANJAN ROY versus STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

RAM NIRANJAN ROY versus STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS.

The appellant committed gross contempt in the face of the High Court by his objectionable and contumacious behaviour, including shouting, baiting, and lowering the dignity of the court. He further committed criminal contempt by tampering with the High Court's order and filing a false affidavit before the Supreme Court. The High Court's immediate action and punishment, as well as the Supreme Court's imposition of fine and possible imprisonment, were justified given the gravity of the contempt.

Parties
Appellant: Ram Niranjan Roy; Respondents: State of Bihar and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
31 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment and Order Dated 27.01.2004
Outcome
Appeal disposed of; impugned High Court order affirmed; no interference.
Legal Topics
Contempt in the Face of Court, Criminal Contempt, Court Procedure, Tampering With Court Orders, False Affidavit
Contempt of Court Criminal Law Constitutional Law Contempt in the Face of Court Criminal Contempt Court Procedure Tampering With Court Orders False Affidavit

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ram Niranjan Roy

Appellant

State of Bihar and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment and Order Dated 27.01.2004

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant committed contempt in the face of the High Court under Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
  2. 2 Whether tampering with High Court's order and filing false affidavit before Supreme Court amounts to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant committed gross contempt in the face of the High Court by his objectionable and contumacious behaviour, including shouting, baiting, and lowering the dignity of the court. He further committed criminal contempt by tampering with the High Court's order and filing a false affidavit before the Supreme Court. The High Court's immediate action and punishment, as well as the Supreme Court's imposition of fine and possible imprisonment, were justified given the gravity of the contempt.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of; impugned High Court order affirmed; no interference.

Orders

  • High Court's punishment for contempt affirmed.
  • Appellant directed to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- to Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within four weeks.