Page | 1 Sl. No. 20 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL CONT. CAS (C) No. 59 of 2025 Moirangthem Iboyaima Singh; & Anr. Petitioners Vs. Naorem Praveen Singh; & Anr. Respondents BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. KEMPAIAH SOMASHEKAR (ORDER) 01.08.2025 This contempt proceeding has been initiated by the complainants/petitioners for disobedience of the orders rendered by the learned Single Judge on the writ side in W.P. (C) No. 73 of 2019 dated 22.11.2021. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. BP Sahu is on record, however, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners either physically or through video conferencing. Whereas the learned Advocate General, Manipur, Mr. Lenin Hijam submitted that this contempt proceeding has been initiated by the complainant/petitioner after lapse of about 3 years. On this premises, the learned Advocate General submits that this contempt proceeding does not have any substances to proceed any further keeping in view section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which indicates that no Court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed. KABORAMBA M SANDEEP SINGH Digitally signed by KABORAMBAM SANDEEP SINGH Date: 2025.08.06 13:14:09 -07'00' Page | 2 In a given peculiar facts and circumstances in this matter are concerned, it is deemed appropriate to refer to the judgment of VM Kanade Vs. Madhao Gadkari and Others reported in (1990) 1 Mah LR 544 (Bom) Bombay, which held that initiation of any proceeding for contempt is barred after the expiry of the period of 1 year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed. Therefore, keeping in view the ratio of this reliance inclusive of section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 are concerned, this contempt proceeding does not survive for consideration. Consequently, this contempt petition is hereby dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE Sandeep