1 conp-24-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 24 OF 2010 Tirumala Hospitality Services Pvt Ltd. ...Petitioner Versus Common People’s Front & Ors ...Respondents Shri J. P. Cama with Harshad Gokhale, Anupam Surve and Atman Mehta i/by M/s Haresh Mehta & Co. for the Petitioner. Respondents are present in person in the Court. Shri. P. A. Pol, Public Prosecutor for the State. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND A.R.JOSHI, JJ. DATED:- 1st February, 2011. P.C. 1. This contempt petition has been filed by the original respondents in the proceedings before the Industrial Court, Pune being Complaint (ULP) No.151 to 155 of 2010, filed by the respondents-contemners against them. It is stated in the petition that the respondents- contemners have sent communication to various Dignitaries dated 25th November,2009 (Exh. A to the Petition) wherein insinuations and 2 conp-24-10 allegations are made against the Sitting Judge of this Court constituting criminal contempt of Court under Section 2 (c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 2. Show cause notice was issued to the respondent Nos. 2 to 4. Initially, they filed reply affidavit to contest the petition. One of the defence taken is that the communication sent to different Dignitaries would not constitute Criminal Contempt of Court and would clearly fall in the excepted category provided under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 itself. However, when it was brought to the notice of the respondents-contemners that they have sent communication to Dignitaries other than specified under the statutory provision, it is doubtful whether they would be entitled to take forward defence taken in the present proceedings. Pursuant to the said observation made by the Court; coupled with the fact that later on the respondents Nos. 2 to 4 have taken conscious decision that they would withdraw the communication sent by them dated 25.11.2009 and also tender unconditional apology to this Court, which they have now placed on record dated 25.1.2011. In other words, the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 contemners, having realized their mistake and having withdrawn the contents of the communication dated 25.11.2009 and have also tendered unconditional apology before this Court with assurance not to 3 conp-24-10 repeat such activities in future which assurance is accepted in terms of this order, we discharge the show cause notice issued to the respondents-contemners and dispose it of accordingly. 3. The Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, who are personally present in the Court, undertake that they will take immediate steps to withdraw offending communication dated 25th November, 2009 from the record of the Industrial Court proceedings forthwith. That assurance is accepted. It is submitted that they have already withdrawn the said communication from all the dignitaries and they have informed them in that behalf. 4. The contempt petition stands disposed of on the above terms. (A.R.JOSHI, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)