J&K High Court Issues Contempt Warning to Minister for Non-Compliance With Order: “Needful Shall Be Done Before Next Hearing”

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court warned a minister of contempt for delaying compliance with its order. The court dismissed the government’s argument that the minister was busy with the ongoing Assembly session. It emphasized that official duties cannot justify non-compliance with judicial directives.

Srinagar: The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court voiced its strong disapproval on Wednesday regarding the delay in payment of dues owed to a man by the Union Territory.

A bench comprised of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Puneet Gupta dismissed the government advocate’s argument that additional time was necessary because the relevant minister was occupied with the ongoing assembly session in Jammu.

Also Read: [Contempt of Court Case] “Supreme Court Issuing Notices Both The Jharkhand’s Chief Secretary & Acting DGP Anurag Gupta”: CJI

The Court emphasized that the petitioner has been awaiting his rightful dues for 14 years and warned that the minister could face contempt of court charges if the order is not followed.

The Court stated while scheduling the matter for hearing on March 14,

“The needful shall be done before the next date of hearing, failing which this Court shall be at liberty to make the Minister concerned as the contemnor No. 4 on the next date of hearing for creating hurdles in the compliance of the orders passed earlier,”

The Bench was addressing a contempt petition filed by the late Mohammad Afzal Reshi, represented by his son, against the government for its failure to comply with a court order dated September 4, 2024.

Also Read: [Illegal Tree Felling] “454 Trees Illegally Felled in Violation of Court Orders”: SC Issued Contempt Notice to UP Officials

That order had directed the State to release outstanding payments to the petitioner for certain civil works completed in 2015 and had imposed costs of Rs.9 lakh on the government officials.

Since the payment remained unpaid, the petitioner filed the current contempt plea.

Advocate Irfan Andleeb represented the petitioner, while Senior Additional Advocate General (AAG) Abdul Rashid Malik, along with Assisting Counsels Mohd Yousuf Hafiz and Rahella Khan, appeared for the respondents.

Also Read: “Appearing Before a Court in a Drunken State is Inexcusable and Amounts to Contempt of Court”: HC Convicts Lawyer for Threatening Judge

In a Contempt of Court case in India, the legal provisions governing contempt are primarily found in,

1. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971:

• Section 2 of the Act defines two types of contempt:
  • Civil Contempt: Wilful disobedience of any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ, or other processes of a court.
  • Criminal Contempt: Any act or publication which scandalizes or lowers the authority of the court, prejudices or interferes with judicial proceedings, or obstructs the administration of justice.

2. Article 129 of the Indian Constitution:

• It confers the Supreme Court the power to punish for its contempt. The article states that the Supreme Court is a court of record and has all powers to punish contempt of itself.

3. Article 215 of the Indian Constitution:

• This article grants similar powers to the High Courts, declaring them courts of record and giving them the power to punish contempt of their jurisdiction.

FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE