HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 324 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J. 1. Heard Sri D.R. Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants. 2. This intra court appeal has been filed challenging impugned judgment dated 20.08.2025 passed by Single Judge in contempt proceedings relation to Contempt Petition (Civil) No.2392 of 2025. 3. We confronted the appellants' counsel as to how a special appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 is maintainable against such an order arising out of contempt proceedings in view of the legal position propounded in various judgments in this regard. Learned counsel submitted that in the same proceedings the earlier Bench had exercised its discretion on 31.07.2025 to summon the concerned official in the light of the allegations made in the application submitted under section 16 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, but, when the said officer appeared before the learned Single Judge on 20.08.2025 without interrogating him, the contempt proceedings were dropped, which could have not been done. He has placed reliance on judgments passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, (1963) 3 SCR 338 : AIR 1962 SC 1893, Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. and others v. Chunilal Nanda and others, (2006) 5 Supreme Court Cases 399 : 2006 SCC OnLine SC 628, and Rajan Chadha and another v. Sanjay Arora, 2025 INSC Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Aviral Srivastava, Dadu Ram Shukla (D.R. Shukla ) Counsel for Respondent(s) : Shyama Devi And Another .....Appellant(s) Manish Kumar Tehsildar Judicial Tehsil Gonda Sadar Dist. Gonda .....Respondent(s) 546 as well as of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Ashwani Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others passed in Special Appeal No.400 of 2021 (Neutral Citation No.2022 AHC-LKO-33336-DB. 4. We have perused the impugned judgment. An applicant, who files the contempt application, is in the status of an informant and nothing more. Contempt proceedings are between the Court and the alleged contemnor. 5. In the case at hand, the learned Single Judge, who was hearing the contempt application, has not made any observation on the merits of the matter, rather he has opined that merely because certain judgments/precedents were not taken into consideration by a judicial officer that by itself will not constitute a contempt, and has also observed that once a judicial order is passed it is always open for the aggrieved partied to challenge the same before the appropriate court in appropriate proceedings, but it cannot be said that merely because certain judgments, which were cited before it, have not been considered, a contempt would be made out. Thus, the contempt judge has exercised his discretion not to proceed in the contempt matter. This is hardly a matter where a special appeal would lie. The special appeal, in our opinion, is not maintainable and even otherwise, we do not find any reason to entertain it. 6. The Special Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed without prejudice to the right of the appellants to pursue their remedies prescribed. September 23, 2025 Manish Himwan SPLA No. 324 of 2025 2 (Prashant Kumar,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench