1 S.B. Contempt Petition No. 989/2009 Suo moto vs. S.P. Baran Date of order : 29.03.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI, J. Mr. N.A. Naqvi, AAG, for the contemnor. Despite there being orders with regard to the appearance of the SHO, police station Baran Sadar along with the case diary, he did not appear in the Court on 26.10.2009. On 26.10.2009, this Court directed the Superintendent of Police, Baran to make the arrest of the Station House Officer, Baran Sadar and produce him before the Court on 28.10.2009 but neither S.P. Baran complied with the orders of the Court and produce the SHO, police station Baran Sadar nor the case diary was produced, hence, a notice to S.P. Baran was given by this Court asking him to explain as to why should not the contempt proceedings be drawn against him. S.P. Baran appeared in person on 30th October 2009 and Mr. N.A. Naqvi AAG on behalf of the contemnor filed reply in the Court. Today he has also filed the copies of the result of the disciplinary proceedings drawn against the delinquent employees Heera lal, S.I and Brij lal A.S.I. 2 2. Heard learned Additional Advocate General and carefully perused the relevant material available on record. 3. Having reflected over the submissions made by him, and carefully scanned the orders dated 28.10.2009, it is noticed that both the delinquent employees Heera lal, S.I and Brij lal A.S.I police station Sadar Baran were served with the charge-sheet under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal), Rules, 1958 and on completion of inquiry, both of them have been found guilty and punished with the stoppage of three increments with the cumulative effect. So far as these two delinquent employees are concerned, they had been removed from the police station much earlier by the Superintendent of Police concerned. 4. Learned Additional Advocate General also explained in the reply that Superintendent of Police, Baran could not appear in the Court on 28.10.2009 on account of the fact that he received the arrest warrant on 27.10.2009 and at that time he was out of the station, and had gone to investigate one criminal case registered in the offence under Section 302 of IPC. That was the reason, he could not make himself present in the Court. Otherwise there was no reason not to comply with the orders of this 3 Court. I am fully satisfied with the explanation furnished by learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of the contemnor. Mr. Om Prakash S.P., Baran. Pursuant to the orders of this Court, both the delinquent employees Sub-Inspector Heera lal and Brij lal Assistant Sub-Inspector have been removed from the police station and they have been found guilty and punished with the stoppage of three increments, hence, I do not find any reason to proceed further in this case and the proceedings drawn against Mr. Om Prakash, S.P., Baran are ordered to be dropped. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. Mak/- 42