1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Criminal Contempt Petition No.5/2008 (Vinay Shardaprasad Tiwari .vs. State of Mah. And ors. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders ======================================= Mr. A.A. Naik, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Y.B. Mandpe, APP for Respondent no.1. Mr. J.T. Gilda, Advocate for Respondents 2 & 5. .......... CORAM : K.J. ROHEE &, A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. In response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent no.2 tendered unconditional apology on 23.7.2008 for the publication in question. That was accepted by this Court and he was directed to publish the apology in his newspaper within a week. In daily Hindustan dated 31.7.2008 the apology was published. However, it was not as per the directions of this Court and the date therein was wrongly mentioned as 30.8.2008. Hence by order dated 7.8.2008 respondent no.2 was directed to publish correct apology within one week. In pursuance of the said order, respondent no.2 published an apology in 2 daily Hindustan dated 17.8.2008. The said apology bears date 16.8.2008 and mentions that the apology is being published “in case there has been contempt of the Court”. This was not in the proper spirit and was not within time. Respondent no.2 filed his affidavit dated 1.9.2008 justifying the delay by stating that he was suffering from fever from 8.8.2008 and that is why the delay. He also produced medical certificate issued by one Dr. D.K. Bade showing that respondent no.2 was suffering from viral fever and was advised complete bed rest from 8.8.2008 to 14.8.2008. Respondent no.2 filed another affidavit today i.e. on 9.9.2008 tendering unconditional apology for wrong publication on 16.8.2008. He also undertook to publish apology by 12.9.2008 in Dainik Hindustan of Yavatmal edition (initially the date was wrongly mentioned as July and it was lateron corrected as September). 3. From the history given above, it would be seen that though respondent no.2 tendered unconditional apology on the very first day i.e. on 23.7.2008, he is not at all serious about the same particularly in publishing the apology in proper words. It is obvious that respondent no.2 deliberately used wrong words while publishing apology which in fact aggravated the contempt. We express our anguish about the manner in 3 which respondent no.2 has conducted himself. We, therefore, impose cost of Rs.5000/- on him to be paid within one week and direct him to publish proper apology within one week from today without fail. 4. In response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent no.5 tendered unconditional apology on 29.7.2008. He was directed by this Court to publish the apology in his newspaper within one week. Respondent no.5 published apology in daily Hindustan dated 17.8.2008 by mentioning therein that the apology is being published “in case there has been contempt of the Court”. The said apology is dated 16.8.2008. Now the said apology was published neither within time nor in proper words. Today i.e. on 9.9.2008 respondent no.5 filed his affidavit again tendering unconditional apology for the delay which has been caused in the publication. It was further contended in the affidavit that there has been some error in the publication of the apology and hence he has again published apology in daily Hindustan, Yavatmal edition on 9.9.2008 bearing the date as 8.9.2008. 5. We are not satisfied with the reason put forth by respondent no.5 for the delay in publishing the apology as well as the words used by him in the first publication of the apology. It is 4 obvious that respondent no.5 deliberately used wrong words while publishing apology which in fact aggravated the contempt. We express our anguish about the manner in which respondent no.5 conducted himself. We, therefore, impose cost of Rs.5000/- on him also to be paid within one week. 6. With this the proceedings are dropped. JUDGE JUDGE halwai