Prima facie criminal contempt: repeated court communications and allegations justified issuance of show cause notice.

Repeated direct communications to the Court, allegations against counsel and departmental officers, and a conditional partial withdrawal of those allegations were treated as conduct tending to prejudice and interfere with the due course of pending proceedings. On that basis, the Court found a prima facie case of criminal contempt and held that further action under the contempt jurisdiction was warranted. A show cause notice was issued under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conduct disclosed in the affidavit and communications amounted to prima facie criminal contempt warranting action under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Analysis: The conduct complained of included rejected intervention, direct e-mails and fax communications to the Court, repeated allegations against counsel and departmental , and a conditional attempt to withdraw only part of the allegations while reserving the right to press them elsewhere. The Court treated this pattern as seeking to prejudice and interfere with the due course of the pending proceedings and held that further action under the contempt jurisdiction was warranted.

Conclusion: A prima facie case of criminal contempt was found, and a show cause notice was issued under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

---