Contempt case: Apex court orders forthwith release of two UP officials held in custody

Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered forthwith release of two secretaries of the Uttar Pradesh finance department, who were taken into custody on the orders of the Allahabad High Court in a contempt case.

The matter was mentioned for urgent hearing before a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice P S Narasimha, which took it up on board.
Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, appearing for the state, told the bench that an "unprecedented order" has been passed by the high court by which the finance secretary and special secretary (finance) have been taken into custody in a contempt matter in a case related to facilities for retired high court judges.
Nataraj said the high court has also issued bailable warrants to the chief secretary of the state in the matter.

"Issue notice, returnable on April 28, 2023. Till the next date of listing, there shall be a stay of the operation of the orders of the division bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated April 4, 2023 and April 19, 2023. The officers of the Government of Uttar Pradesh, who have been taken into custody, shall be released forthwith,¿ the bench said in its order.

It said registrar (judicial) of the apex court shall communicate the order both telephonically and on e-mail to the registrar general of the high court for immediate compliance.

In its April 19 order, the high court had observed that having regard to the averments made in the affidavit and the conduct of the officers "suppressing material facts and misleading the court, prima facie, have committed criminal contempt of the court."

It had said the officers present in the court -- Shahid Manzar Abbas Rizvi, Secretary (Finance) UP and Sarayu Prasad Mishra, Special Secretary (Finance) -- were taken into custody and they shall be produced before the court on April 20 at 11 am for framing of charge.

"Issue bailable warrants to chief secretary, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, and Dr Prashant Trivedi, Additional Chief Secretary (Finance) UP, Lucknow, through the chief judicial magistrate concerned, to ensure their presence before this court on April 20, 2023," the high court had said, adding the officers shall show cause as to why charge may not be framed against them.

Also read: Lawyers can't go on strike or abstain from judicial works: SC

In its April 4 order, the high court had noted that pursuant to the March 23 order, secretary finance, special secretary, finance and principal secretary Law of the Government of Uttar Pradesh, were present along with the record.

It had said the court was constraint to summon the officers as the matter pertaining to providing domestic help and other facilities to the former chief justices and former judges of the high court was kept pending on one pretext or the other.

"On repeated request made by the Additional Advocate General, that the matter is pending consideration at the highest level, as many as, five adjournments over several months was granted. However, the authorities did not take decision," the high court had noted in its April 4 order.

"In view thereof, it is relevant to take note that the finance department was unnecessarily objecting to the proposal without suggesting that the proposed rules/guidelines forwarded by the high court could be given effect to by issuing a fresh/amended Government Order in purported exercise of powers under Article 162 of the Constitution as was done by the government earlier," it had said.

The high court had directed that the rules/guidelines, as proposed by it, shall be forthwith notified by amending or incorporating the Government Order of July 3, 2018.

It had also directed that the finance department would accord approval within a week thereafter.

This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever.