Jharkhand HC drops charges, asks ex-MLA to deposit Rs 2.5 lakh for Kerala reliefhttps://indianexpress.com/article/india/jharkhand-high-court-drops-charges-asks-ex-mla-to-deposit-for-kerala-relief-5331889/

Jharkhand HC drops charges, asks ex-MLA to deposit Rs 2.5 lakh for Kerala relief

While warning Yadav to be careful in future, the High Court said, “The opposite party definitely appears to have crossed the threshold of propriety in making unwarranted comments upon the delivery of the judgment of conviction and sentence...”

While the court had convicted Lalu in the case pertaining to fraudulent withdrawal of Rs 3.3 crore from Dumka treasury in the early 1990s, it had acquitted former chief minister Jagannath Mishra.

The Jharkhand High Court has directed former RJD MLA Bhola Yadav to deposit Rs 2.5 lakh towards Kerala flood relief, while dropping contempt proceedings against him for allegedly making derogatory comments against the judiciary, following a fodder scam case verdict.

In an order passed on August 21, a division bench of Justices Aparesh Kumar Singh and Ratnakar Bhengra said, “We are of the opinion that his unconditional and unqualified apology can be accepted, subject to payment of cost of Rs 2.5 lakh. The cost be paid towards Kerala Relief Fund in the designated account.”

The court, however, said Yadav had crossed the threshold of propriety while making comments after a special CBI court announced its judgment convicting RJD chief and former Bihar chief minister Lalu Prasad in a fodder scam case. While the court had convicted Lalu in the case pertaining to fraudulent withdrawal of Rs 3.3 crore from Dumka treasury in the early 1990s, it had acquitted former chief minister Jagannath Mishra.

The special CBI court took suo motu cognizance of the alleged deregatory remark the former RJD MLA made in a Hindi daily on March 24 and issued a showcause notice for contempt of court to Yadav. Yadav tried to get relief from the High Court, but was asked to appear before the lower court in the matter. The lower court concluded that the statements amounted to “scandalising the image of the court” and referred the matter to the High Court.

Advertising

While warning Yadav to be careful in future, the High Court said, “The opposite party definitely appears to have crossed the threshold of propriety in making unwarranted comments upon the delivery of the judgment of conviction and sentence…”