Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10606 (GAU)

Xxxx Xxxx v. In Re- Rohini Kumar Das

2026-05-11

Devashis Baruah

body2026
JUDGMENT : DEVASHIS BARUAH, J. Heard Mr. G. Baishya, learned Senior Counsel, who is also the Standing Counsel of the Gauhati High Court, assisted by Ms. D. Bora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Gauhati High Court. I have also heard Mr. D. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the contemnor. 2. The present contempt proceedings had been initiated Suo Moto, on the basis of the directions passed by this Court in the Judgment and Order dated 08.12.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 5728/2021. 3. The reason as to why the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has observed that it was necessary for initiating a Suo Moto contempt proceeding against the contemnor can be seen from paragraph Nos. 36 & 37 of the Judgment and Order dated 08.12.2023. The said two paragraphs are reproduced herein below – “36. Though both the writ petitions are disposed of with the present order, the aspect of the issue of violation of the order dated 02.11.2021 in WP(C)/ 5728/2021 by the then DFO, Dhemaji one Shri Rohini Kumar Das cannot be obliterated, more so, when the violation is apparent. This Court has further noted that in spite of a specific order passed by this Court on 07.03.2022 in WP(C)/1608/2022 directing the said incumbent to show cause as to why action under the Contempt of Courts Act should not be taken against him, till now no cause has been shown by the said incumbent. Though an affidavit has been filed by the said incumbent on 16.03.2022, the affidavit was only to tender an apology and no cause has been shown at all in response to the order of the Court. There is also no order passed by this Court accepting such apology. This Court has also noticed that the PCCF & HoFF was also directed to apprise the Court as to why consequential orders should not be passed against the erring respondents of the Forest Department. However, till now there is no response to the said directions contained in the order dated 07.03.2022. 37. Accordingly, Registry is directed to register a separate suo moto contempt proceedings against Shri Rohini Kumar Das, the then DFO, Dhemaji and issue notice to him. Such notice is to be sent through the PCCF & HoFF, Assam, Aranya Bhawan, Panjabari, Guwahati-781037, Assam for onward transmission to the alleged contemnor. 37. Accordingly, Registry is directed to register a separate suo moto contempt proceedings against Shri Rohini Kumar Das, the then DFO, Dhemaji and issue notice to him. Such notice is to be sent through the PCCF & HoFF, Assam, Aranya Bhawan, Panjabari, Guwahati-781037, Assam for onward transmission to the alleged contemnor. order The 07.03.2022 passed dated in WP(C)/1609/2022 is also required to be made part of the said contempt proceedings. The returnable date in the said notice may be given as 12.01.2024.” 4. It is also relevant to take note of that the above observations were made by the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the Judgment and Order dated 08.12.2023 on account of a violation of the certain interim directions continued in the order dated 02.11.2021 passed in WP(C) No. 5728/2021. A perusal of the said order dated 02.11.2021 would show that certain interim directions were passed by the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, thereby directing the respondents in the Forest Department not to proceed further with the tender process, in terms of the E-Auction Notice, under NIT No. FDMT B Mahal General/2021/1716 dated 11.06.2021 issued by the Divisional Forest Officer (for short, “DFO”), Dhemaji Division, Dhemaji until further orders of the Court. 5. It is however, very relevant to take note of that in the said order dated 02.11.2021, the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had also recorded the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Forest Department that a letter of intent had however already been issued to the Respondent No. 5 in the said writ proceeding. It was also submitted that the respondent Forest Department therein had neither handed over the possession of the said Mahal to the said Respondent No. 5 nor Agreement was signed for that Mahal, as environment clearance of the said Mahal was yet to be obtained and acceptance of the mining plan of the same has not yet been completed. 6. This Court has also perused the affidavit which was filed by the Contemnor in the instant proceeding, wherein it is mentioned that pursuant to the order dated 02.11.2021 nothing further was carried out in as much as neither the possession was handed over nor the agreement was signed with the Respondent No. 5. 7. 6. This Court has also perused the affidavit which was filed by the Contemnor in the instant proceeding, wherein it is mentioned that pursuant to the order dated 02.11.2021 nothing further was carried out in as much as neither the possession was handed over nor the agreement was signed with the Respondent No. 5. 7. This Court has also taken note of the affidavit filed by the alleged contemnor to the effect, wherein, he had purged the contempt and thereupon, tendered his unconditional apology. 8. Taking into account the above, it is the opinion of this Court that further continuation of the instant contempt proceeding would not be in the interest of justice. 9. Accordingly, accepting the unconditional apology tendered by the Contemnor, this Court, in the interest of justice, closes the instant contempt proceeding.