Delhi High Court Sets Limits on Initiating Contempt for disobeyed directs | Delhi News – Times of India

New Delhi: Delhi High Court Remedies Ruled That Violation of Every Direction Issied byThe Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Delivered This Judgment on Aug 12 While Hearing a Contempt Petition Filed by 2002 Indian Forest Services Officers Sanjiv Charturvedi. The petition accuced the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Intelligence Bureau (IB) of Willful Disobedience of Court Orders Directing the production of relevant records, relevant records, Ib report Chaturvedi.The court has been initially issued these orders to the IB on July 27, 2023, and reiterated them on aug 21, 2024. Lightly. “The bench while hearing the appeal passesses sufficient power to compel a party to produce documents. However, The Violation of Each and Every Direction Issued by the Bench Dogs Not CALL for the Initiation of Contemption Proceedings, “The Order said.Chaturvedi, the former Chief Vigilance Officer of AIIMS Delhi and 2015 Ramon Magsaysay Award Winner, Had Sought the Court’s Direction to Compel the IB to Provide the Threat Assessment Report Concerning He alleged that the IB disobeyed the court’s Aug 21, 2024 Order. The main case is Scheduled for Hearing Before a Coordinate Bench on Sept 10, 2025.The dispute dates back to may 2014, when the second secretary of the ministry of environment, forest and climate change (Moef & C) Requested the IB Director to Assess Threats to Chhaturvedi ‘. However, The Moef & cc declined to provide the report under the RTI act. After Chaturvedi’s appeal, the Central Information Commission Ordered the IB’s CPIO in April 2016 to disclose the report, but the ib challenged this order in the delhi hospital.In Aug 2017, The HC dismissed the IB’s appeal. The IB then Moved an Appeal Before The Division Bench in Oct 2017, which is still pending.THe bench also noted that contempt proceedings cannot be initiated against an office when the name of the contemnor is unknown. “The Contempt Proceedings cannot be initiated against an office since the Respondent has not even provided the name of the contemnor,” The court observed.Senior Advocate Sudarshan Goel Highlighted The Difentialy, Saying, Saying, “When the IB has Neither a website no the name of the name of the cpio in the public domain, how could their name befouched before the Count?” He noted that in March Last Year, A Single Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna Issued Contempt Notices to the CPIO of the CBI without Naming Him.Goel Further Pointed Out that Under Section 2 (B) Of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, Willful Disobedience of Any Court Order Constitus Conscious Contempt and Can leadings.