- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CCC NO. 1122 OF 2024 (CIVIL) BETWEEN: 1. HARSHA TEJASWINI C AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS W/O. NAVEEN MS R/A NO. 525 KAVERI APARTMENT SHARADADEVINAGARA MYSURU - 570 022 …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. JOSE P. VERGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIKAS M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PROF. N.K. LOKANATH VICE-CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY OF MYOSR E AGED MAJOR S/O. NOT KNOWN R/A CRAW FORD HALL MYSURU - 570 005 Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 2. PROF. N. NAGARAJA THE REGISTRAR (EVALUATION) UNIVERISTIY OF MYSORE AGED MAJOR S/O. NOT KNOWN R/A CRAW FORD HALL MYSURU - 570 005 3. SMT. SHYLAJA THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF MYSURU AGED MAJOR D/O. NOT KNOWN R/A CRAW FOOD HALL MYSURU - 570 005. …ACCUSED (BY SRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY T.P., ADVOCATE) THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO TRY THE ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES COMMITTED FOR WILLFULLY DISOBEYING THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2024 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP NO.13671/2024 (S-RES) AND PUNISH THE ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Jose P. Verghese for learned advocate Mr. M. Vikas for the complainant and learned advocate Mr. T.P. Rajendra Kumar Sungay for the respondents. 2. The complainant has been undergoing her Doctoral work for Ph.D in Microbiology under the University of Mysore-respondent No.2 herein. The writ petition came to be filed by the petitioner out of the grievance where the petitioner had sought permission for change of Guide for her Ph.D studies. 2.1 While disposing of the petition on 14.06.2024, learned Single Judge inter alia issued the following directions which has become the subject matter of the alleged non-compliance under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. "[b] The submissions that the petitioner's research work for her doctoral work shall continue with the University is taken on record, and consequentially, the petitioner shall be entitled to access and use all the lab facilities with the University as earlier and her doctoral work shall be guided by the newly recognized guide without any other changes." - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 3. The contempt of Court has been alleged by the complainant- petitioner on the premise inter alia that though the direction was to entitle the complainant to access and use the laboratory facilities in course of her studies, she is denied the access to such facilities which she was using earlier. It is the case that the keys of the deep freezer and the Almirahs have not been given to the complainant despite the Court's order. It is further stated that isolates from different sources, microbial growth media and other chemicals, total 200 in numbers, costing lakhs of rupees are locked in the deep freezer which are again not parted with by the respondents. 3.1 In course of the submissions, learned Senior Advocate for the complainant elaborated his grievance and such facts of missing isolates from the deep freezer. 4. In response to the contempt proceedings, reply affidavit is filed by the Registrar of the University in which, the correctness of the claim of the complainant is denied. It was stated in the affidavit inter alia thus, "…pursuant to the said direction the University in order to ascertain the correctness of the claim made by the complainant has arranged a meeting of the Chairman of the Department of Micro Biology, the Former and Present Guides of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 the complainant and decided to issue communication to all the Research students including the complainant to be present on 06.01.2025 at Research Laboratory 5/A, Department of Studies in Microbiology, Mysore along with two other Professors of the University to open the Refrigerator, Almirah, and Deep Freezer to identify and authenticate their Cultures, Chemicals and Isolates kept there. Accordingly, on 06.01.2025 in presence of the Chairman, Former and Present Guides and two other Professors of University of Mysore, complainant and other 5 Research students in the Department of Studies in Microbiology, the Laboratory, Refrigerators, Almirah, and Deep Freezers were opened and all the research students have identified their Cultures, Chemicals and Isolates kept therein including the complainant and the total number of Isolates belonging to the Complainant were 112 apart from other Cultures and Chemicals." 4.1 It was stated that proceedings are video recorded and the students who were present including the complainant signed the recorded proceedings. It was also stated that at the time of mahazar, the cultures and chemicals in isolates where those which were reflected in the bills produced by the complainant showing the purchase thereof. By detailed averments, the respondent- University denied the allegations of the complainant that she is not permitted access to the facilities or that the isolates were not allowed access for that they are missing. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 4.2 It is to be noted that the respondents have produced the copy of the minutes of the meeting of the Board of the Department of Studies in Microbiology held on 06.01.2025, wherein the following is recorded, "In the research laboratory allotted to Prof. Shubha Gopal for her Research Work, Research Lab 5/A, Department of Studies in Microbiology, University of Mysore, Manasagangotri, Mysuru, a total 4 number of Almirahs are present. The Chairman requested to open the all the Almirahs with the permission of the members present in the Lab. The Chairman requested Mrs. Harsha Tejaswini and all other Research Scholars to identify and to authenticate the chemicals belonging to them Mrs. Harsha Tejaswini has personally verified the chemicals present in the Almirahs. Mrs. Harsha Tejaswini has claimed the following the three bills for chemicals and Glass wares. • Bill No.1 MV369-100G Lactobacillus MRS HiVeg Broth - 1 No which has been handed over during 04-11-2023. (The receipt acknowledgement enclosed). • Bill No.2 4100 F.B. Flask 24/29, 250 ml. Borosil -1 No. - which is handed over during the meeting held on 06-01-2025. Bunsen Burner W/Stop Clock - 1 No. - which is handed over during the meeting held on 06-01-2025. • Bill No.3 Brain Heart Infusion Broth - 100 gms - 1 No. - which is handed over during the meeting held on 06-01-2025." - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 4.3 It was stated that the complainant acknowledged the receipt of the above articles. It was further stated that two refrigerators were maintained at Prof. Shubha Gopal laboratory to maintain the microbial cultures and isolates. The other details of the isolates and Petriplates were found in the other refrigerator by the complainant who acknowledged the receipt of the same. It was also stated in the minutes that the other research scholars identified the isolates, cultures, chemicals and articles and the same were kept back in the refrigerator for the use. 4.4 It was the say of the complainant that the boxes were not found. It was further stated that one deep freezer was maintained at the said Laboratory. It was opened with the permission and the complainant was asked to identify and confirm the articles. Responding to this, the complainant claimed that no boxes were found related to her isolates. Other Research Scholars, however, could identify the articles and the same were kept back in the deep freezer for further use. 4.5 With the aforesaid submissions and the factual assertions, it was contended by the respondents that no contempt is committed. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 5. The controversy unfolds to a state of things where there is a word against word. On one hand, the complainant contends that certain isolates or cultures were put by her in the deep freezer, whereas, the said fact is denied by the other side and the minutes of the Board meeting was recorded as reproduced above. The issues raised by the parties involve highly disputed questions of fact. 5.1 It is one of the serious area of dispute whether the petitioner had put her isolates in the deep freezer or not and if they were put, whether they went missing because of the conduct of the respondents. These aspects need factual inquiry and evidence is required to be lead. 6. It is not possible for the Court to hold, in such circumstances, any of the respondents or officers of the University to be guilty of contempt of court much less willful contempt. The complainant may have other remedy to assert and enforce her rights. However, the contempt could not be alleged and could not be established in view of the above facts highlighted by the Court. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:558-DB CCC No. 1122 of 2024 7. In the aforesaid view, there is no substance in the present contempt petition. It is dismissed. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50