ABUB @ ABU AHMED MAZUMDAR v. MUKESH KUMAR AND 2 ORS.
Cont.Cas(C)/316/2026 · 2026-06-14
Manish Choudhury
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8031 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8031 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No. 1/2 GAHC010118712026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/316/2026 ABUB @ ABU AHMED MAZUMDAR S/O MOHIBUR RAHMAN MAZUMDAR, R/O 08, ITKHOLA, BASGHAT, SILCHAR, DIST- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788002 VERSUS MUKESH KUMAR AND 2 ORS.
BRANCH MANAGER, AU SMALL FINANCE BANK, LUNKARANSAR BRANCH, SHOP NO. 152, NEW DHAN MANDI, LUNKARANSAR, DIST- BIKANER, RAJASTHAN, PIN- 334603 2:SARVPREET SINGH SAHNI BRANCH MANAGER AU SMALL FINANCE BANK PHASE NO. VII MOHALI BRANCH SCF 20 SAS NAGAR PHASE VII DIST- MOHALI PUNJAB PIN- 160059 3:L RAVI SHANKAR BRANCH MANAGER AU SMALL FINANCE BANK PAWAN PURI BRANCH BIKANER NO. BK9 PAWAN PURI NEAR BIKANER NURSING HOME DIST- BIKANER RAJASTHAN PIN- 33400 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY, J SARMAH,M N RONGMEI,MRS. R
Page No. 2/2 RONGMEI Advocate for the Respondent : ,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 15.06.2026
Heard Mr. P.K. Roychoudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. R. Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Roychoudhury has submitted that in the Order dated 21.05.2026 [Annexure-18] passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar in Silchar Police Station Case no. 366/2024, the learned court has observed that the conduct of the A.U. Small Finance Bank has amounted to contempt of the court. Meaning thereby, the respondents who are responsible in-charge and day-to-day conduct of the affairs of the concerned bank i.e. the A.U. Small Finance Bank would come under the purview of Section 10 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and they are liable thereunder. As it transpires that the copy of the Order dated 21.05.2026 has not been brought to the notice of the alleged contemnor and that the petitioner’s contemplated action to initiate proceeding under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 are not brought to the notice of the Court, this contempt petition is closed, by granting liberty to the petitioner to bring the Order dated 21.05.2026 to the notice of the alleged contemnor along with contemplated action to be initiated by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 at first. The petitioner is granted liberty to file the contempt petition afresh thereupon, if the order dated 21.05.2026 is not adhered to by the alleged contemnors.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant