1 conp.3.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.3 OF 2010 Kantilal Oswal ...Petitioner Versus Mr.Suresh M.Chiplunkar & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Vishal Thaker with Ms.Anjali Trivedi for Petitioner. Mr.Manoj Kondekar with Mr.Kiran Mohite & Mr.Prajit Manjrekar i/b Mr.Mandar Ranade for Respondents 1 to 15. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, A.P.P. for Respondent No.16. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND U.D.SALVI, JJ. DATED:- SEPTEMBER 14, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the Petitioner and the Respondents. 2. This Petition has been filed to take action against the named Respondents who were incidentally signatories to the communication sent by them to the District Judge dated 22nd June 2009. That communication was essentially to oppose the grant of anticipatory bail to Ritesh Oswal. Emphasis is placed on the last paragraph of the said communication. Even on fair reading of the said statement, we do not think it necessary to initiate contempt action against the Respondents. In our opinion, no case for 2 conp.3.10.sxw initiating contempt action against the Respondents is made out on the basis of the contents in the last Paragraph of communication dated 22nd June 2009. 3. The Petitioner’s Counsel, however, was persuading us to take action against the signatories of communication dated 26th April 2010. Indeed, the statement made therein is objectionable. Even so, in our opinion, no fruitful purpose would be served by precipitating the matter. Although we may agree with the Counsel for the Petitioner that irresponsible and contemptuous statement has been made in the said communication which affects the prestige of the Court, in the fact situation of the present case, we do not intend to precipitate the matter any further. 4. Petition disposed of on the above terms. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)