LI Network
Published on: December 19, 2023 at 12:00 IST
The Delhi High Court has underscored that the effective functioning of the judicial system is compromised when parties are allowed to retract from their commitments without providing valid reasons.
Justice Jasmeet Singh emphasized the gravity and solemnity associated with court proceedings, stating that parties cannot casually give undertakings without a genuine intention to fulfill them. The Court expects sincere and conscious efforts from parties to comply with the undertakings they provide.
In a plea brought by the State Trading Corporation of India Limited, seeking contempt proceedings against officials of Akshata Mercantile Pvt. Ltd., Justice Singh made these observations.
The contempt plea was initiated based on the violation of an undertaking given in August 2014 before a Metropolitan Magistrate in a case under Sections 138, 141, and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
According to the undertaking, Akshata Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. officials committed to repaying Rs. 10 crores to Rs. 15 crores every continuing month to the State Trading Corporation, ensuring the total outstanding amount is settled within 6 to 8 months. Since the undertaking remained unfulfilled, the contempt plea was filed.
Justice Singh found the full-time Director of Akshata Mercantile guilty of contempt, holding him responsible for the non-compliance of the undertaken commitments before the Metropolitan Magistrate.
Consequently, the court granted a four-week period for the Respondent No. 2 to file a reply, showing cause as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated for failing to comply with the undertaking given in 2014.
Given the official’s failure to make the agreed payments in line with the judicial order, the court regarded the apology as lacking bona fides.
The court acknowledged that an apology could be considered as a mitigating factor, but its credibility depends on the nature of disobedience and the circumstances surrounding it.