Contempt Petition to Supreme Court under Section 12 of Contempt of Court Act
1971 for initiating Contempt Proceedings against contemnors for non compliance
of order of Supreme Court.

Format of Contempt Petition to Supreme Court to initiate Civil Contempt
Proceedings,  format
download.

As per Section 12 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971, Punishment for contempt of
court, (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law,
a contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which
may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees,
or with both:

(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law, a
contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may
extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or
with both:

Provided that the accused may be discharged or the punishment awarded may be
remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the court.

Explanation. – An apology shall not be rejected merely on the ground that it
is qualified or conditional if the accused makes it bona fide.

Sample format of Contempt Petition to Supreme Court under Section 12 of
Contempt of Court Act is given below:

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. _________OF 20__
IN
TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO. __ OF 20__

IN THE MATTER OF:
MR. _______________________                            
APPLICANT
NEW DELHI

VERSUS

M/S __________ LTD                                            
ALLEGED CONTEMNOR
THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER
NEW DELHI, DELHI

AND IN THE MATTER OF:
M/S _______________________ LTD                 
PETITIONER
NEW DELHI, DELHI

VERSUS

MR. _______________________                        
RESPONDENT
NEW DELHI

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANTS U/S 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT,
1971 READ WITH RULE 3 (c) OF THE RULES TO REGULATE PROCEEDINGS FOR CONTEMPT OF
THE SUPREME COURT, 1975 FOR INITIATING CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE
ABOVE-NAMED ALLEGED CONTEMNOR FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE JUDGMENT/ ORDER DATED
_____ OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE AFORE-MENTIONED TRANSFER PETITION.

To,
The Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India
And his other Companion Judges of
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

Humble Application of the Applicants above named:

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:-

1. That the applicant above-named is filing the instant application seeking
initiation of contempt proceedings against the above-named alleged contemnor for
willfully disobeyed the specific directions of this Hon’ble Court issued vide
order dated _____, in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. __ of 20__ captioned as
______Ltd v. Mr. ______________ wherein the Reserve Bank of India had challenged
the order dated ______; passed by the Central Information Commission directing
the ___ Ltd to disclose information as desired by the Applicant. This Hon’ble
Court considered the case for disclosure of information sought for by the
applicant under the Right to Information Act, 2005 from the Reserve Bank of
India which was vehemently opposed and denied by the banks. This Hon’ble Court
while directing disclosure of such information under the RTI Act observed and
held as under:

“The submission of the ___ Ltd that exceptions be carved out of the RTI Act
regime in order to accommodate provisions of ___ Act. RTI Act, 2005 contains a
clear provision (Section 22) by virtue of which it overrides all other Acts
including Official Secrets Act. Thus, notwithstanding anything to the contrary
contained in any other law like ___ Act or Banking Regulation Act, the RTI Act,
2005 shall prevail insofar as transparency and access to information is
concerned. Moreover, the RTI Act 2005, being a later law, specifically brought
in to usher transparency and to transform the way official business is
conducted, would have to override all earlier practices and laws in order to
achieve its objective. The only exceptions to access to information are
contained in RTI Act itself in Section 8”.

“____Ltd is supposed to uphold public interest and not the interest of
individual banks. ___Ltd is clearly not in any fiduciary relationship with any
bank. __Ltd has no legal duty to maximize the benefit of any public sector or
private sector bank, and thus there is no relationship of ‘trust’ between them.
__Ltd has a statutory duty to uphold the interest of the public at large, the
depositors, the country’s economy and the banking sector. Thus, __Ltd ought to
act with transparency and not hide information that might embarrass individual
banks. It is duty bound to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act and
disclose the information sought by the respondents herein”.

“The baseless and unsubstantiated argument of the __Ltd that the disclosure
would hurt the economic interest of the country is totally misconceived. In the
impugned order, the CIC has given several reasons to state why the disclosure of
the information sought by the respondents would hugely serve public interest,
and non-disclosure would be significantly detrimental to public interest and not
in the economic interest of India. __Ltd’s argument that if people, who are
sovereign, are made aware of the irregularities being committed by the banks
then the country’s economic security would be endangered, is not only absurd but
is equally misconceived and baseless”.

A copy of the order dated ____ passed by this Hon’ble Court in Transfer Petition
(Civil) No. __ of 20__ is annexed and marked as ANNEXURE A-1. (Pgs. ).

2. It is pertinent to mention at the outset that this Hon’ble Court
out-rightly rejected the submissions made by the ______ that the statutory
provisions of confidentiality in the _________ Act and the Credit Information
Companies (Regulation) Act, 2005 would be repealed or overruled by the Right to
Information Act, 2005 if the banking institutions are forced under law to
furnish the information under the RTI Act. This Hon’ble Court after taking note
of the provisions under the ___________Act, the Reserve Bank of India, the
________Act, 2005, and the Preamble to the Right to Information Act, 2005
categorically observed and held that:

“The CIC has considered elaborately the information sought for and passed
orders which in our opinion do not suffer from any error of law, irrationality
or arbitrariness. We have, therefore, given our anxious consideration to the
matter and came to the conclusion that the Central Information Commissioner has
passed the impugned orders giving valid reasons and the said orders, therefore,
need no interference by this Court rafter considering the submissions”.

Information sought by the Applicant:

3. That the applicant had filed an application dated _____ seeking
information from the Department of _____ Ltd regarding the loss caused to the
nation in the _______ case.
A copy of the RTI application dated _____ addressed to the ____________ is
annexed and marked as ANNEXURE A-2. (Pgs. ).

4. That the _____ Ltd vide letter dated _____ and _____ denied to furnish
most of the information sought by the applicant on the gins to findings of
Annual Financial Inspection (AFI) and Scrutiny of ____ conducted under section
__ of the ____ Act, ___ and action taken thereon. Disclosure of such information
received in a fiduciary capacity will prejudicially affect the economic interest
of the state and hence is exempt from disclosure under section 8 (1) (a), (d),
and (e) of the RTI Act, 2005. A copy of the reply dated _____ by the ____Ltd and
a copy of the reply dated ____ by the ______ is annexed and marked as
ANNEXURE A-3. (Pgs. ) and ANNEXURE A-4.(Pgs. )

5. That the applicant preferred first appeal challenging the order dated
________ and ________ passed by the ______ vide first appeal dated ________
which was rejected by the First Appellate Authority vide an order dated
________. Thereafter, the Applicant challenged the said order before the CIC
vide Appeal No. ________; dated ________ wherein the CIC vide an order dated
________ observed and held as under:

“The PIO has denied information on queries 1 and 2 on the basis of Section
8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. This was upheld by the FAA which further observed that
information relating to MTM position of banks are obtained by ___ for
discharging the regulatory an supervisory functions and are held by ___ in
fiduciary capacity.

In the present matter, it is clear that while banks may have given
information to ___ in confidence or in trust, there does not appear to be any
duty cast upon ____ to act in their benefit. ____ being a regulator of the
banking sector obtains/maintains such information in regulatory/ supervisory
capacity. Therefore, there is no element of choice as such available to banks.
There does not appear to be a creation of any fiduciary relationship between
____ and the banks, as laid down above. Therefore, the PIO’s contention that
information in queries 1 and 2 is exempt under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act is
rejected. Moreover, for the reasons mentioned above- a larger public interest
would be served by disclosing this information under Section 8(2) of the RTI
Act. In view of the same, this Bench is of the considered opinion that whether
information sought in query 1 and 2 is exempted under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI
Act, Section 8(2) of the RTI Act would mandate disclosure of the information
sought.

Further, as regards queries 9 and 10, the CPIO has not claimed any
exemption either in the initial reply or subsequently for denying the
information”.

The CIC while allowing the appeal directed the CPIO, FED to provide the
relevant information before _____. A copy of the order dated ______; passed by
the CIC; in Appeal No. ______is annexed and marked as ANNEXURE A-5. (Pgs.
)

6. That against the CIC’s order dated ______ the ___ filed a Writ Petition
(Civil) No. __ of ______ before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi praying for
quashing of the order dated ______ passed by the CIC, Delhi. Due to numerous
orders passed by the CIC as well as by the Hon’ble High Court across the country
directing the Company to furnish information sought by the applicants under the
RTI Act, the ______ preferred Transfer Petitions before this Hon’ble Court. The
Transfer cases were allowed by this Hon’ble Court vide an order dated ______ .
This Hon’ble Court vide an order dated ______has held that it is mandatory for
the Company to furnish the information sought by the applicants and directed the
______ furnish the same.

7. That the Company on ______ replied to the first information sought by the
Applicant wherein the ______ was asked to furnish information regarding “Before
the ______ Court, Company has filed an affidavit stating that the total mark to
market losses on account of ___________ is to the tune of more than Rs. _____
Crores. Please give bank wise breakup of the ___ Losses”. The ___ vide the said
letter replied by annexing the relevant portion of the affidavit filed by the
___ before the Hon’ble ____ High Court in WP (Crl.) No. ___ of ____ and denied
loss caused more than ______ crore on account of currency derivative. A copy of
the letter dated _______; by the Company India is annexed and marked as
ANNEXURE A-6. (Pgs. )

8. That the Respondent Company have deliberately and willfully disobeyed the
specific directions issued vide order dated ______, in the captioned transfer
petition, directing the Respondents to furnish the information sought by the
Applicant from the Company as contained in the RTI application dated ______. The
___ till date has not furnished the information sought by the Applicants and
therefore have committed deliberate and willful defiance of this Court’s order.

In view of the abovementioned facts it is respectfully submitted that this
Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

PRAYERS
a) Initiate contempt proceeding against the alleged contemnor/respondents for
willfully and deliberately disobeying the direction of this Hon’ble Court vide
judgment dated ____; passed in the Transfer Petition (Civil) __ of 20__;

b) Pass any other or further order/s as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

FILED BY

_______________________

ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANT

Drawn by: _________, Advocate
New Delhi

Dated: ________

 

Section 12 in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

12. Punishment for contempt of court.-

(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law, a
contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may
extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or
with both: –

(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law, a
contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may
extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or
with both:

Provided that the accused may be discharged or the punishment awarded may be
remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the court.

Explanation.-An apology shall not be rejected merely on the ground that it is
qualified or conditional if the accused makes it bona fide.

 

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in
force, no court shall impose a sentence in excess of that specified in
sub-section (1) for any contempt either in respect of itself or of a court
subordinate to it.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, where a person is
found guilty of a civil contempt, the court, if it considers that a fine will
not meet the ends of justice and that a sentence of imprisonment is necessary
shall, instead of sentencing him to simple imprisonment, direct that he be
detained in a civil prison for such period not exceeding six months as it may
think fit.

(4) Where the person found guilty of contempt of court in respect of any
undertaking given to a court is a company, every person who, at the time the
contempt was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company
for the conduct of business of the company, as well as the company, shall be
deemed to be guilty of the contempt and the punishment may be enforced, with the
leave of the court, by the detention in civil prison of each such person:
Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such person
liable to such punishment if he proves that the contempt was committed without
his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent its commission.

(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4), where the contempt
of court referred to therein has been committed by a company and it is proved
that the contempt has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is
attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or
other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer
shall also be deemed to be guilty of the contempt and the punishment may be
enforced, with the leave of the court, by the detention in civil prison of such
director, manager, secretary or other officer.

 

Explanation.-For the purposes of sub-sections (4) and (5),-

(a) “company” means any body corporate and includes a firm or other
association of individuals; and

(b) “director”, in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm.