AJAY KUMAR PANDEY Vs IN RE:- PIYUSH VERMA ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) JALAUN AT ORAI
Bench: KURIAN JOSEPH,ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Case number: Crl.A. No.-000115-000115 / 2016
Diary number: 612 / 2016
Advocates: EJAZ MAQBOOL Vs
Page 1
1
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 115 OF 2016
AJAY KUMAR PANDEY Appellant(s) VERSUS
IN RE:- PIYUSH VERMA ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) JALAUN AT ORAI Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J. 1. The appellant is aggrieved since he has been convicted under the Contempt of Courts Act and sentenced to undergo six months' imprisonment. There is also a direction that the appellant shall not enter the premises of District Judgeship, Auraiya, U.P. for a period of five years. 2. In another case, the appellant suffered the same punishment and we are informed that the appellant has served the term of six months in jail. While the appellant was serving the term, this appeal was moved and taking note of the remorseful conduct, as expressed through the learned counsel, we permitted the appellant to file an affidavit before the High Court. Accordingly, the appellant has filed an affidavit before the High Court and a copy of the same has been produced on 27.06.2016. Paragraphs 8
Page 2
2
to 11 of the said Affidavit dated 03.05.2016 read as follows :-
"8. The deponent states that he
sincerely regrets that his conduct
was inappropraite.
9. The deponent hereby tenders an
unconditional apology and assures
this Hon'ble Court that the deponent
shall never indulge in any
inappropraite behaviour of similar
nature in future.
10. The deponent undertakes to
never indulge in any behaviour which
in any manner would result in
lowering the prestige of any Court in
India.
11. The deponent is extremely
remorseful of his past conduct and is
tendering an unconditional apology
for his past conduct and assures this
Hon'ble Court that he will not
indulge in any such behavior in
future also and is sincerely praying
that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to accept the
present unconditional apology."
Page 3
3
3. In a recent Judgment in Mahipal Singh Rana Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2016) 6 SCALE 353, [Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2006], a three-Judge Bench of this Court has held that once an advocate is convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude, his licence to practice will stand suspended for a period of two years. 4. Now that the octogenarian father of the appellant has taken initiative to appeal to the good sense of his son, who is around 50 years of age, and in view of the apology, we are of the view that the appellant need not undergo further incarceration. Therefore, this appeal is allowed to the extent of removing the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant, but retaining the order in all other respects and additionally, with the imposition of the suspension of licence for a period of two years.
5. Mr. Gaurav Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has submitted that the jail authorities have not yet released the appellant, though he has already served six months in jail, apparently on the ground that the sentence is not concurrent, but consecutive. Now that we have passed the Judgment in this appeal removing the sentence of imprisonment from the impugned Judgment, the
Page 4
4
appellant shall be released forthwith, unless he is required to be detained in connection with any other case.
.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J. [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ] New Delhi; July 29, 2016.