Appeal from the Judgment and Order dated 22 5 1974 of the Allahabad High Court in Contempt Case No.
2 was actively associ ated with the passing of the resolution which companytained disparaging remarks about the Chief Justice and since he also issued that resolution for publication in newspapers, he is guilty of Criminal Contempt.
Yogeshwar Prasad, Miss Rani Arora, S.K. Bagga and Mrs. Bagga, for Respondent No.
Mukherjea, R.N. Sharma, Umesh Chand, R.N. Trivedi, P. Pathak, Hari Nath Tilhari, S.R. Srivastava, M.N. Sharma and O.P. Lal for the Appellants.
1, he is as much guilty of having companymitted companytempt as companytemner No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAY, C.J. This appeal is against the judgment and order dated 22 May 1974 of the High Court of Allahabad in Criminal Contempt Case No.
1 2 are guilty of companytumacious companyduct, and the High Court gave the ground that they were responsible for the passing of the resolution.
P. Rana for Respondents 2 and 3.
There were three charges against the appellants.
The High Court held that since the resolution was passed under the presidentship of the first appellant described as companytemner No.
315 of 1974.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The High Court further held that companytemners Nos.
The High Court held that the Chairman of the Action Committee, described as companytemner No.
2 was.
The High Court however discharged the numberices.
43 of 1973.
The High Court issued numberices to five persons on the ground that they companymitted companytempt of Court.
The two appellants before us are the President of the Avadh Bar Association and the Chairman, Action Committee of the Avadh Bar Association.
The text of the resolution was this The Action Committee is of the opinion that the Chief Justice is acting in the dis charge of administrative power under clause 14 of the U.P. High Courts Amalgamation Order, 1948 in a most partisan manner under the influence of Allahabad Bar quite unbecoming of the office which he holds.
The gist of the charge against the appellants was that they had met and resolved that the Chief Justice was acting in a most parti san manner under the influence of the Allahabad Bar.
43/73.
The High Court discharged the numberices.
