IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA OR. CR. MISC No.1 of 2009 THE STATE OF BIHAR Versus CONTEMPT AGST.S.P.,AURANGABAD ----------- 4/ 09.12.2009 Heard. The contemnor was issued notice on contempt of the subordinate court, i.e., Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad who was trying S.T. No. 406 of 2006/143 of 2006 arising out of Navinagar P.S. Case no. 21 of 2003 because in spite of being repeatedly requested to ensure the production of witnesses before the above noted trial judge, the contemnor did not comply or did not even send response of his letter issued by the trial judge. It must be noted that a Judge is never happy to issue a notice on contempt to any one, specially under a situation which is obtained in the case in hand. It was extremely distressing to find that a Judge in the rank of Additional Sessions judge was making requests through his several letters to the Superintendent of Police for producing witnesses and the requests were not being heeded to. It was not that it was the solitary instance of one district Aurangabad and on that particular day, the court was confronted with similar situation in other jurisdictions like Gaya, Jehanabad, Supaul, Muzaffarpur, Banka and Patna. This was the reason that the court took a serious view of the matter to issue a notice on which the present proceeding has been initiated. In his show cause, the contemnor has tendered unqualified apology and has further averred that since after the receipt of the - 2 - intimation, the witnesses in the above noted trial have been produced except one who is I.O. of the case and who is posted in some jurisdiction in Jharkhand and who is also likely to be produced on the next date. It has been further contended that in fact contemnor was transferred from Aurangabad and, as such, could not further pursue the orders of this court on production of witnesses and he had never indulged in disobedience of any court’s order and he will never do so in future. Considering the facts, as stated on oath by the contemnor in his show cause, I am satisfied that a case is made out for recalling the rule issued against the Superintendent of Police, Jehanabad. The apology and the reasons shown by him are accepted and the proceedings are dropped in expectation that the court does not have any further reason of the type which was the basis for issuing a notice on contempt against the present officer of the State. Anil/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)