1 cri-contempt-pet.22-10 mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.22 OF 2010 Mr. Krishna S. Singh ..Petitioner Vs. Satish Singh & Anr. ..Respondents Petitioner present in person. Mr. H.J. Dedhia, A.P.P. for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & U.D.SALVI, JJ. DATED: 15th March, 2011 P.C. We have heard Mrs. Singh, the petitioner party in person. She alleges that respondent No.1 Shri Satish Singh, her husband, is causing interference with malafide intention, in the Court proceedings and, therefore, he should be punished for contempt. 2. On perusal of this petition it appears that the petitioner has filed M.J. Petition No.A/1593/09 in the Family Court at Bandra in which Shri Satish Singh is the respondent and, therefore, he is entitled to appear in the 2 cri-contempt-pet.22-10 said case and contest it. Mrs. Singh thereafter submitted that respondent No.1 is causing interference in the cases she has filed before the Labour Court as well as Industrial Court at Mumbai. If Shri Satish Singh is not a party in these proceedings before the Labour/Industrial Courts he obviously has no locus and if he is doing anything which amounts to interference in the due process of law, Mrs. Singh has to bring it to the notice of the Labour/Industrial Courts to take cognizance so as to make a reference to this Court. 3. We are, therefore, satisfied that there is no case made out to take cognizance of any criminal contempt as defined under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 4. Hence the Criminal Contempt Petition is rejected. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)