Read Time: 06 minutes

A division bench of Karnataka High Court today dismissed a criminal contempt petition initiated suo moto against a person for filing a writ petition with the power of attorney of a dead person.

Court while dismissing the contempt noted that it is for the Magistrate to ascertain the correct date of death based on evidence and the writ court cannot do the same.

The above was held in a plea wherein a writ petition was filed in 2018 before a Single Judge Bench of the High Court under Article 227 of the constitution challenging the orders of a trial court. The plea was filed by one Jayamma through her power of attorney holder.

In September 2021, the respondents in the writ petition filed the death certificate of Jayamma dated 2017 and told the court that the writ petition had been filed using the power of attorney after the death of Jayamma. The single judge, on hearing this submission, held that prima facie the writ petitioner had filed the plea after the death of Jayamma.

It was held by the single judge that the petitioner had approached the court knowing fully well that filing a petition under the authority of a dead person amounts to interfering with the course of the judicial process under the contempt of courts act. The Registrar (Judicial)  judicial was, therefore, directed to place the case before the Chief Justice for consideration.

Thereafter, the matter was considered by a division bench headed by Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Ashok Kinagi. Court stated that the respondent has made an allegation that the plea has been filed on behalf of a dead person by misusing the Power of Attorney. The respondent contended that the petitioner Jaymma has died on February 4, 2017 whereas the plea has been filed in 2018, Court noted.

In reply to the contempt charges, the accused had replied that Jayamma died in May 2018 and for which he filed a death certificate to substantiate his claim. The accused further told the court that Jayamma was very much alive at the time of filing of writ and as such the allegation of misuse of process of law is wrong.

Court, upon hearing the parties, held that these claims are a matter of evidence as to whether Jayamma died on one of the claimed days and as to whether the above two death certificates belong to the same dead person.

Court, therefore, directed that it would be appropriate that the respondent in the writ petition may file his complaint u/s 340 CrPC before the Magistrate or may take any other legal course to get the death of Jayamma established.

The court concluded that unless and until the death of Jayamma is confirmed on a particular date, it cannot be presumed as to when Jayamma died and contempt proceedings against the accused cannot be initiated. The contempt petition was therefore dismissed.

Case title: High Court of Karnataka Vs Navedulla