-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 19 OF 2005 Sanjay Sitaram Khemka........ ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.. ... Respondents. Mr. S.S.Khemka for the Petitioner. Mrs. P.H.Kantharia, APP for the Respondents. CORAM : R. M. LODHA & CORAM : R. M. LODHA & CORAM : R. M. LODHA & NARESH H. PATIL, JJ. NARESH H. PATIL, JJ. NARESH H. PATIL, JJ. DATED : 11TH AUGUST, 2006. DATED : 11TH AUGUST, 2006. DATED : 11TH AUGUST, 2006. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : We considered the averments made in the criminal contempt petition and also the report from the Special Metropolitan Magistrate, 48th Court, Andheri, Mumbai. 2. We are of the view that the cognizance of the criminal contempt does not deserve to be taken. However, the allegations made in the petition need to be enquired into on the administrative side. Let the petition be placed before the Honourable the Chief Justice on administrative side for appropriate action as may be thought fit. -: 2 :- 3. With regard to the surety of Mrs. Premshil Gupta in the sum of Rs.20,000/-, we are of the view that the said surety needs to be discharged immediately. We order accordingly. However, the personal bonds executed by the petitioner - applicant shall remain operative. 4. With the aforesaid observations, criminal contempt petition is disposed of. Sd/- (R. M. LODHA, J.) (R. M. LODHA, J.) (R. M. LODHA, J.) Sd/- (NARESH H. PATIL, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)