Excelsior Correspondent
SRINAGAR, Mar 10: High Court today accepted the apology tendered Deputy Commissioner, Additional Deputy Commissioner of Anantnag district, and senior Additional Advocate General for producing ADC Anantnag as DC Anantnag before the High Court by the senior AAG on February 4 this year.
The Court vide its order dated 31st December 2022 had granted officers including Deputy Commissioner Anantnag last and final opportunity of four weeks for filing reply and in default it was made clear that the District Magistrate, Anantnag shall remain present before the court and the matter was directed to be listed on February 4. However, the senior AAG had produced ADC instead of DC before the court which was taken note by the court.
“Since the unconditional apology have been tendered by Abdul Rashid Malik, learned Sr. AAG and the two officers although belated, but same seems to be bona fide and as they have shown remorse and repentance of their acts, the same is accepted by this Court,” a bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal said and accordingly closed the proceedings which were initiated by the Court.
“Undoubtedly, the apology cannot be a defense of justification or an appropriate punishment for an act which tantamount to contempt of court,” the court said, adding, “The apology can be accepted in a case where the conduct for such an apology given is such that it cannot be ignored without compromising the dignity of the court.”
The court said that apology cannot be accepted in case it is hollow and that there is no remorse, no regret, no repentance, or if it is only a device to escape the rigor of the law. “Such an apology can merely be termed as a “paper apology”. So, an apology should not be “paper apology” and expression of sorrow should come from the heart and not from the pen; for it is one thing to ‘say’ sorry, it is another to ‘feel’ sorry.”
The court said that the power to punish for contempt is a rare species of judicial power which by the very nature calls for exercise with great care and caution.
“Such power ought to be exercised only where “silence is no longer an option,”” the court said
Being a member of the Bar, the court said, it was a duty of Sr. AAG, Abdul Rashid Malik not to demean and disgrace the majesty of justice dispensed by a court of law. “The judicial process is based on probity, fairness and impartiality which is unimpeachable,” the court said.
“Since the unconditional apology have been tendered by Abdul Rashid Malik, learned Sr. AAG and the two officers although belated, but same seems to be bona fide and as they have shown remorse and repentance of their acts, the same is accepted by this Court and the proceedings which were initiated by this Court in the present petition as such are closed for the reasons stated hereinabove”.
In the meantime, HC disposed the case of petitioner directing the DC Anantnag to hear both the parties and decide the case on the merit.
The petition says he is the owner in possession of land measuring 5 marlas and 6 sirsais situated at Bidder Hayatpora Hangulgund Tehsil Kokernag, District Anantnag on which he has already constructed his shopping complex and the same is functional on spot.
He claims that he became owner of the land by virtue of Section 4 and Section 8 of Agrarian Reforms Act and by virtue of power of attorney and agreement to sell executed by the original owner Prithvi Nath Hangloo S/o Mahadev Nath original owner resident of Bidder Hayatpora Pati Hangul Gund Tehsil Kokernag District Anantnag in 2003.
However, in 2019 Soma Devi D/o Late Nand Lal Hangloo W/O Jawahir Lal Pandita and Chuni Lal Hangloo S/O late Badrinath Hangloo claimed before the DC Anantnag that the petitioner had grabbed their land.
Follow our WhatsApp channel