1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.10 OF 2003 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.10 OF 2003 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.10 OF 2003 Arvind S. Ghatpande ...Petitioner Vs. Ram Jethmalani & Ors. ...Respondents ----- Ms.P.H.Kantharia for Respondents CORAM: H.L.GOKHALE & CORAM: H.L.GOKHALE & CORAM: H.L.GOKHALE & SMT.R.S.DALVI,JJ. SMT.R.S.DALVI,JJ. SMT.R.S.DALVI,JJ. DATED: 4th JULY, 2005 DATED: 4th JULY, 2005 DATED: 4th JULY, 2005 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Petitioner is not present. From the photocopy of the disputed statement attributed to the Respondent and from the news item containing the same it is not clear as to when and where the statement was allegedly made by the Respondent. The name of the Journalist giving the news is also not printed. In the absence of any such particulars, at the most it would amount to a irresponsible journalism on the part of Respondent Nos.2 and 3. Apart from the statement, it is supposed to have been made and printed in the news paper concerned nearly six years ago on 29th August, 1999. The Petition itself was filed just one day before one year was to expire after the alleged statement was printed. The matter was not moved for nearly three years and was placed before a single Judge taking Civil Contempts on 29th October, 2002, who directed it to be placed before a Division Bench taking a criminal contempt. Thereafter also two years 2 and nine months have gone before the matter has been placed before this Bench. In view of the facts noted above, we do not deem it prudent to entertain this Petition. The same is dismissed. (H.L.GOKHALE,J.) (H.L.GOKHALE,J.) (H.L.GOKHALE,J.) (SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.) (SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.) (SMT.R.S.DALVI,J.)