Sold Property During Pending Appeal, Defied Court Order: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sends Man To Jail For Contempt Hostile Witness Cannot Erase a Bribe Demand Already Made on Record: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Ration Officer Three Decades of Unpaid Wages: Supreme Court Strips Gannon Dunkerley of Control Over Sick Company's Assets, Appoints Administrator to Pay Workers by August 2026 Gram Nyayalaya Cannot Touch Family Court's Maintenance Orders — Allahabad High Court Draws the Line Caste Abuse Allegation at Village Jatra Is Counter-Blast to Earlier Machete Attack: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Despite SC/ST Act Bar Contributory Negligence | Not Wearing a Helmet Does Not Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Madras High Court Air Force Can't Punish Officer After Criminal Court Sets Him Free: Supreme Court Overturns 30-Year-Old Dismissal Written Statement Without Affidavit of Admission/Denial: Non-Est Filing or Curable Defect? Delhi High Court Refers Conflicting Views to Larger Bench Bank's Negligence Killed Cheque Bounce Case Before It Could Begin: Supreme Court Rules Section 138 Remedy Lost Due to Stale Cheques Bank Letting Your Cheques Go Stale Is Deficiency in Service: Supreme Court Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Benefit Of Probation Act Available Even If Offender Is Sentenced Solely To Fine: Supreme Court Reporting Registration Of FIR Based On Public Records Does Not Violate Right To Privacy: Sikkim High Court CBSE Cannot Cancel Class XII Results Based on Similar MCQ Answers Alone Without Any Report of Malpractice From Examination Centre: Orissa High Court

"Prima Facie Case for Initiating Criminal Proceedings": Allahabad Court Restrains Advocate Santram Rathore from Practicing Due to Contempt of Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the court has issued a notice to Advocate Santram Rathore, restraining him from entering the court premises or practicing in the District Judgeship. The Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi presided over the case, stating that there is a "prima facie case for initiating the criminal proceedings under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971" against Rathore.

The case originated from a reference made by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Pilipbit, who reported that Rathore had made derogatory comments against the court and accused the presiding officer of corruption. The reference also mentioned that Rathore tried to obstruct court proceedings and used abusive and derogatory language.

The court has issued a notice to Rathore, asking him to show cause as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him for "creating obstruction in the proceedings of the court, misbehaving the court, using abusive and derogatory language, scandalizing the court etc."

The notice also stipulates that Rathore may file a reply through counsel after the service of the notice. The Registry has been directed to send a copy of the reference written by the presiding officer along with the notice.

In light of the persistent acts of alleged contempt, the court has imposed immediate restrictions on Rathore. He is barred from entering the court premises or practicing in the District Judgeship until the next date of listing. He is also required to be present in court on the next date fixed in the matter.

Sri Sudhir Mehrotra has appeared for the Court, and his name will be shown in the cause list whenever the matter is listed next. The Registry has also been directed to hand over a complete set of records to Sri Mehrotra within three weeks.

The case is set to be listed after the service of notice, marking a crucial juncture in the ongoing contempt proceedings against Advocate Santram Rathore.

Suomoto

In Re vs  Santram Rathore 

Latest Legal News