1 2025:CGHC:37452-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MA No. 136 of 2024 Shailendra Gyanchandani, S/o. Late Chuhadmal Gyanchandani, Aged About 49 Years, Through His Son Ayan Gyanchandani, Aged 20 Years, R/o. House No.15, Mahalakshmi Enclave, Sihawa Road, Shyama Prasad Mukherji Ward No.10, P.S. City Kotwali, Dhamtari, Tahsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Anjneya Vaishnav (Superintendent Of Police), Office Of The Superintendent Of Police Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, Pin 493773 2 - Neha Pawar (City Superintendent Of Police) Office Of The City Superintendent Of Police, Police Station City Kotwali, Dhamtari, Tahsil And Dist. Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, Pin 493773. 3 - Rajesh Marai (S.H.O.) City Kotwali, Dhamtari, Tahsil And Dist. Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, Pin 493773 4 - Amit Baghel (S.H.O.) Police Station Rudri, Dhamtari, Tahsil And Dist. Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, Pin 493776 ... Respondents ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.08.01 18:12:55 +0530 2 For Appellant : Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate For Respondents : None (Division Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board (31.07.2025) Sanjay K. Agrawal, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short “the Act of 1971”) against the order dated 21.10.2024, by which the learned Single Judge has decided not to initiate contempt proceeding and accordingly the contempt case has been closed. 2. Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the learned Single Judge has committed legal error in not initiating contempt proceeding against the respondents in light of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1. 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 3 3. Section 19(1) of the Act of 1971 would be relevant, which reads as under : 19. Appeals. – (1) An appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt— (a) where the order or decision is that of a single judge, to a Bench of not less than two judges of the Court; (b) where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court: Provided that where the order or decision is that of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court. 4. 4. Appeal under Section 19(1) of the Act of 1971 is maintainable only against the order or decision of High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. Since the learned Single Judge has decided not to initiate proceeding for contempt, therefore, the appeal is not maintainable under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act of 1971. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed summarily without notice to other side. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Judge Ashok