U.P. Police censures Officers for threatening Local Commissioner appointed by Delhi HC
News

U.P. Police censures Officers for threatening Local Commissioner appointed by Delhi HC

Aditi Singh

Pursuant to the Delhi High Court’s outrage against certain Meerut Police Officials for threatening a Local Commissioner appointed by the High Court, the Uttar Pradesh Police has “censured” two officials in its departmental proceedings under Section 4, Clause(B)(4) of U.P. Subordinate Police Officers (Punishment and Appeal) Regulations, 1991.

Justice Manmohan had lambasted the Officials for an alleged contempt of court and not “appreciating the seriousness of the situation”.

The Local Commissioner was appointed in a litigation between Patanjali Ayurved Limited and Kalpamrit Ayurved Pvt. Limited.

Subsequently, Patanjali  filed an application under Order 39 Rule 2A read with Section 151 CPC, stating that the concerned Station House Officer not only refused to provide the Local Commissioner appointed by Delhi High Court with any police assistance, but also threatened him. The Officer also alleged that the order passed by the High Court, which was produced by the Local Commissioner, was a fabricated document.

The High Court then issued notice to the contemnors and also sought the personal presence of Inspector General of Police, Meerut Range.

The Inspector General, Meerut Range, Uttar Pradesh informed the Court that he has issued instructions to the Station House Officer and the district level police officials to implement the Court orders in future with utmost sincerity in a time-bound manner.

The Court then decided to not proceed further with the matter after it was informed that the two contemnors have been “censured” by the UP Police in a departmental proceeding.

In view of the aforesaid circular as well as the action taken by the U.P. Police, this Court is of the view that no further orders are called for in the present application and accordingly it is closed.”, it said.

Patanjali was represented by Advocates Simranjeet Singh, Rohan Ahuja, Sonali Dhir and Mahima Deepak of Athena Legal.

The Contemnors were represented by Advocates Anil Mittal, Komal Aggarwal and Rajesh Kumar.

Read the order:

PatanjaliAyurveda-vs-Kalpamrit.pdf
Preview
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com