Court sets aside hands up in air punishment for accused
PTI
Last Updated:
New Delhi, Aug 3 (PTI) A Delhi court has set aside an order of a magistrate directing some accused people to stand in the court with their hands raised for the entire day after finding them guilty of contempt of court.
Principal District and Sessions Judge Anju Bajaj Chandna was hearing the appeal of Kuldeep and Rakesh, against whom the magisterial court had passed the order on July 15, while hearing a complaint case.
In an order dated August 1, the court said the order did not qualify the test of legality and propriety, and that it was an 'illegal order", passed without adopting legal procedure.
It said, 'Non-furnishing of bail bonds by the accused persons cannot be termed as a contemptuous act by any stretch of imagination." 'The act of accused persons of not furnishing bail bonds does not fall within the scope and ambit of Section 228 (intentional insult or interruption to public servant sitting in judicial proceeding) of the IPC, and can in no manner be taken as intentional insult or interruption to public servant in judicial proceedings," the court said.
It said the magistrate did not afford any opportunity to the accused persons to show cause as to why they should not be proceeded against, and that, without hearing them, the accused people were asked to stand in the court till the rising of the court with their hands straight in the air.
'This kind of sentence is not contemplated in law," the court said, adding, Article 21 of the Constitution conferred fundamental rights of personal liberty, which could be curtailed only by a procedure established by law.
'The object of law is to ensure that basic human rights are not violated. The judges are duty-bound to safeguard basic and natural rights meant for a dignified existence of individuals," the court said.
'Every person appearing before the court (even if involved in a crime) has the inalienable right to live with dignity and is entitled to equal respect. It is the duty of the court to ensure that no person can be detained without proper legal justification or without following due process of law," the court added.
It said the magistrate completely failed in his duty and responsibility to conduct judicial proceedings legally and properly.
'The order convicting the accused persons under Section 228 IPC and sentencing them to stand with their hands in the air till the rising of the court is not sustainable. The magistrate is advised to properly read and understand the legal provisions before using his discretionary power," the court said, setting aside the order.
Earlier, on July 15, Judicial Magistrate Saurabh Goyal, who was hearing a 2018 complaint case, which was at the stage of pre-charge evidence, had passed the order.
He said, 'Despite waiting and calling the matter twice from 10 am till 11.40 am, the bail bonds were not furnished by the accused persons. For wasting the time of the court, which is in contempt of the order duly promulgated on the last date of hearing, the accused persons are hereby held guilty for contempt of court proceedings and are convicted for the offence under Section 228 of the IPC." 'They are directed to stand in the court till the rising of this court with their hands straight in the air," the magistrate added. PTI MNR RHL
view comments
First Published:
August 03, 2025, 21:00 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of state's Land Revenue Act
Shimla, In a major setback to encroachers on government lands, the Himachal Pradesh High Court on Tuesday struck down the section 163-A of Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act 1954, allowing regularisation of encroachments on government lands, terming the section as unconstitutional. Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of state's Land Revenue Act A division bench of the High Court consisting of Justice Vivek Thakur and Justice Bipin Chander Negi ruled that the "Section 163-A of HP Land Revenue Act is manifestly arbitrary and unconstitutional and as a consequence the section and the rules framed there under the said section are quashed". Putting an end to long litigation, the judgment directed the state government to initiate eviction proceedings expeditiously against all such encroachments that were to be covered under the section 163A, preferably on or before February 28, 2026. The dimensions of the encroachments can be measured from the reply of the government which said that there were approximately 57,549 cases of encroachment covering an area of about 1,23,835 bighas of government land. The encroached government land is about 10,320 hectares and in terms of the rules framed under the impugned provision, 1,67,339 applications were received for regularisation up to August 15, 2002 and taking into account the magnitude of encroachments, the high court directed the state government to consider an amendment in the law pertaining to "criminal trespass". The high court clearly stated that any stay granted against removal of encroachment shall stand vacated and also directed the government to make suitable changes in law by amending the relevant Act and rules appropriately to assign duty on the office bearers of Nagar Panchayat, Nagar Parishad and Nagar Nigam as well as executive officer/commissioner concerned to report the encroachment for taking action to remove of encroachment. The HC also instructed the advocate general to transmit the copy of the judgment to the chief secretary of the sate government and all concerned with immediate compliance. Since 1983, successive governments issued various notifications for regularisation of encroachments and the July 4, 1983 notification permitted regularisation up to five bighas on a nominal fee of ₹50 per bigha. Section 163-A was introduced in 2002 during the first tenure of the then chief minister Prem Kumar Dhumal to frame rules for regularising encroachments, with the stated objective of helping small and marginal farmers. However, the High Court on Tuesday ruled that the provision was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before law and attempted to legitimise illegal acts. "The impugned provision is in fact legislation for a class of dishonest persons and equality cannot be claimed in illegality," the judgment said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Himachal HC quashes Section 163-A of states Land Revenue Act
Last Updated: Shimla, Aug 5 (PTI) In a major setback to encroachers on government lands, the Himachal Pradesh High Court on Tuesday struck down the section 163-A of Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act 1954, allowing regularisation of encroachments on government lands, terming the section as unconstitutional. A division bench of the High Court consisting of Justice Vivek Thakur and Justice Bipin Chander Negi ruled that the 'Section 163-A of HP Land Revenue Act is manifestly arbitrary and unconstitutional and as a consequence the section and the rules framed there under the said section are quashed". Putting an end to long litigation, the judgment directed the state government to initiate eviction proceedings expeditiously against all such encroachments that were to be covered under the section 163A, preferably on or before February 28, 2026. The dimensions of the encroachments can be measured from the reply of the government which said that there were approximately 57,549 cases of encroachment covering an area of about 1,23,835 bighas of government land. The encroached government land is about 10,320 hectares and in terms of the rules framed under the impugned provision, 1,67,339 applications were received for regularisation up to August 15, 2002 and taking into account the magnitude of encroachments, the high court directed the state government to consider an amendment in the law pertaining to 'criminal trespass". The HC also instructed the advocate general to transmit the copy of the judgment to the chief secretary of the sate government and all concerned with immediate compliance. Since 1983, successive governments issued various notifications for regularisation of encroachments and the July 4, 1983 notification permitted regularisation up to five bighas on a nominal fee of Rs 50 per bigha. Section 163-A was introduced in 2002 during the first tenure of the then chief minister Prem Kumar Dhumal to frame rules for regularising encroachments, with the stated objective of helping small and marginal farmers. However, the High Court on Tuesday ruled that the provision was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before law and attempted to legitimise illegal acts. 'The impugned provision is in fact legislation for a class of dishonest persons and equality cannot be claimed in illegality," the judgment said. PTI BPL MNK MNK MNK view comments First Published: August 06, 2025, 01:15 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
ED files prosecution complaint in interstate investment fraud case
Panaji: The enforcement directorate (ED), Goa, has filed a prosecution complaint against Krishan Kumar alias Vijay Kumar Jaiswal alias Vijay Kishan Jaiswal, his wife Rashmi alias Rashmi Jaiswal, and three companies promoted by them, in connection with an alleged inter-state investment fraud. The ED filed the prosecution complaint before the special court (Prevention of Money Laundering Act or PMLA), North Goa. The prosecution complaint was filed for the commission of the offence of money laundering as defined under the act. The ED stated that the accused are the directors of the companies. The case arises from multiple FIRs registered by law enforcement agencies against Krishan and others in Goa, Delhi, and Uttar Pradesh for offences under various sections of the IPC, the Goa Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999, and the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The ED investigation revealed that the accused, acting in conspiracy, incorporated three companies, namely Yudivo Marketing Private Limited, Yudivo Lifecare Private Limited, and Yudivo Property and Profits Private Limited, and floated fraudulent multi-level marketing schemes under the guise of direct selling and investment plans. Innocent investors from multiple states were lured with false promises of high returns and incentives, leading to an overall collection of approximately Rs 3 crore from the public at large, the ED said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You To Read in 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The funds collected were misappropriated and diverted for personal use, the ED said, including for the purchase of immovable property and for luxury expenses, with the three companies being the vehicles of the offence of money laundering. 'The accused projected the proceeds of crime as untainted by routing funds through multiple bank accounts of themselves as well as the companies owned and controlled by them and using them in sham business activities,' the ED said. Earlier, the ED attached an immovable property pertaining to the accused persons valued at Rs 72 Lakh, located at Gulshan Ikebana, Sector 143, Noida, under the provisions of the PMLA. This attachment was confirmed by the adjudicating authority under the PMLA.
