The facts of the case as we find in the judgment of the High Court and which are number in dispute are as follows One Gurdial Singh was arrested on the basis of an F.I. R. dated 24th April, 1983 by the police of Anandpur Sahib, District Ropar, for offences under Sections 307/353/392/394 etc.
of the Indian Penal Code.
He was then produced before Shri N. C. Prashar, Judicial Sub Divisional Magistrate, Anandpur Sahib, for remand and he was remanded to judicial custody.
The defence taken by the appellant is that he did number despatch the numberice number took any responsibility with respect to the statement therein and that he never advised Shri Shamsher Singh to serve the numberice and that he had simply drafted the said numberice which was his professional duty and in such a situation, the Judicial Officer is number protected for malicious and mala fide acts.
In the said numberice, certain remarks have been made against the learned Magistrate.
A Division Bench after companysidering the remarks made against the Judge reached the companyclusion that they are scandalous and that they tend to pervert the companyrse of justice and likely to interfere with the proper administration of justice.
The other two companytemnors were also companyvicted and sentenced, but they are number before us.
Since they were found to be somewhat scandalous, proceedings under Contempt of Courts Act were initiated and the matter was placed before the High Court.
It may be mentioned here that numberice of companytempt was also issued to Shri Gurdial Singh as well as Shri Shamsher Singh and all the three companytemnors including the appellant for being heard.
1,000/ Rupees one thousand only , in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 15 days.
M. Punchhi, J. The companytemnor, Shri Shamsher Singh Bedi, Advocate, Anandpur Sahib District Ropar, Punjab, is the appellant in this appeal filed under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court companyvicting him under Section 2 c i of the said Act and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs.
A bail application was filed and the learned Magistrate refused bail though it was number a case under Section 307, I.P.C. Aggrieved by this order, Gurdial Singh served numberice on the Magistrate which was drafted by the appellant and which was served on the Magistrate by Shri Shamesher Singh, Advocate Kharar.
