Calcutta High Court - While exercising contempt jurisdiction, court does not have power to modify order directing contempt

The High Court of Calcutta, in the case of Brahma Deo Mishra v. State of West Bengal (GA 2582 of 2018) has held that while exercising contempt jurisdiction, the trial judge does not have the power to modify its earlier order. Facts The trial judge had passed an order on September 19, 2016 (“Order”). Against this Order, the defendants in the present case filled a recalling petition, while the appellants in the present case filed a contempt petition. The trial judge took both the application for recalling and contempt analogously and modified his earlier Order, and granted a stay on it. The appellants asked for setting aside of the above-mentioned order basis the fact that the trial judge had no jurisdiction to hear the writ petition and had no power to modify his own order while exercising contempt jurisdiction. The defendants argued that contempt jurisdiction does not bar the trial judge from recalling the Order. Decision and Rationale The Calcutta High Court decided that the trial judge should have dealt with the two applications in a segregated manner, and explained its rationale in the following words “Furthermore, if the impugned order is to be read as an order passed in the contempt jurisdiction, we are of the view that the learned trial judge erred in law in modifying a mandatory order passed in the writ jurisdiction subsequently in the contempt jurisdiction. In the contempt jurisdiction, either the power of the writ Court is to hold the contemnors in contempt or reject contempt petition. Power of modification of an order passed in contempt, which is sought, is not available to the trial judge.” Download Pdf