I am going to prove how Gomati Manocha,the Metropolitan Magistrate who has sent Arvind Kejriwal jail,herself deserves to be jailed.
At the outset,let me introduce you about the provision of the Contempt Of the Courts Act,1971.Under section 2 of the Contempt Of the Courts Act ,1971,there are two contempt of the court-civil contempt and criminal contempt…As per the definition of civil contempt,the contempt of court where the order,direction of court and also the legal provision is not followed is civil contempt.This contempt is applied to the Judge and Magistrate also under section 16 of the Contempt of the Courts Act,1971 and even a Judge and Magistrate can be punished for the contempt of itself which may extend to imprisonment of six months.
How Gomati Manocha has committed herself the contempt of her own court?
A Judicial Magistrate is said to commit the contempt of his/her own court if he/she fails to consider the legal provision which should be executed for the end of Justice.
Gomati Manocha has failed to consider the provision of section 95 of the IPC which clearly states that nothing is the offfence which merely causes slight harm against which no one is expected to made complain.
NOW come to the alleged defamation of Nitin Gadkari…It is too difficult to prove what harm Gadkari faced because he has been exposed by the Times Of India which caused more harm against Gadkari but Gadkari didn’t prefer to move to court .The Exposure of the Times Of India made media Chasing Gadkari, resulted in his quittal from the Pressidential Post of his party.Gadkari had not filed defamation case there,meant Gadkari had not casued such harm .In other words,it could not be expected to made complain as it was slight harm or Gadkari Himself had believed corrupt by not lodging Defamation Suit against the Times Of The India.What the case may be for Gadkari,but it is clear that merely saying Gadkari corrupt by Kejriwal was very slight harm even slighter than the harm caused by the The Times Of India.So it can’t be categorized under the purview of criminal case in view of the section 95 of the IPC and if it is kept under the purview of criminal case,then also the allegation of Gadkari is baseless as he himself is believing that he is corrupt by the way of not lodging defamation suit against the Times Of India.
Now let us look into the circumstances which enforced Kejriwal to declare Gadkari Corrupt.Now it is common phenomena to state someone something.Even Narendra Modi has stated Kejriwal an agent of Pakistan without any evidence.It is merely a politics among politicians to blame each other which can’t create a circumstance to defame any particular person because the present condition has made politicians favourable to blame each other and it has been generalized.So,such sorts of statements can’t be kept under the purview of criminal case in order to prevent the misuse of law in view of the section 95 of the IPC.
It is well settled observation that mostly politicians and officers are corrupt which society believe.In such circumstances, if a politician moves to court that someone has said him corrupt,then such complaint should be dismissed following the section 95 of the IPC because society believe such politicians corrupt.
Now it is evident that Gomati Manocha has herself contempted her own court by not considering the section 95 of the IPC and thereafter dismissing the complaint on the ground of the section 95 of the IPC.
Let Gomati Manocha be prosecuted under section 16 of the Contempt of the Courts Act,1971 and be punished for 6 six months.