The prayer for unconditional apology is, therefore, refused. The contemnor is found guilty of gross contempt of this Court. Though the contemnor has tendered unconditional apology, this Division is not in a position to take any lenient view in awarding the sentence–– Appellate Division has perused the application filed by the contemnor offering unconditional apology with a prayer for exonerating him from the charge of contempt of this Court. This Division is unable to accept the unconditional apology offered by the contemnor taking into consideration that the contemnor is a sitting Mayor of Dinajpur Purashobha, Dinajpur. The impugned statements/ comments/remarks made by him apparently show that those comments were made intentionally with the object of maligning and undermining the prestige and dignity of a sitting Judge of the Appellate Division and the highest Court of the country. His statement is so derogatory and contemptuous that if he is let off, any person will be emboldened to make similar statements/remarks/comments interfering with the administration of justice and also undermining the authority of this Court in the estimation of the people in general. The prayer for unconditional apology is, therefore, refused. The contemnor is found guilty of gross contempt of this Court. Though the contemnor has tendered unconditional apology, this Division is not in a position to take any lenient view in awarding the sentence. In the light of Appellate Division’s discussions, the matter is disposed of finding the contemnors guilty of gross contempt and accordingly awarding him simple imprisonment for a period of 1(one) month with a fine of Tk.1,00,000.00 (one lac) and directing him to deposit the same to the Gausul Azam BNSB Eye Hospital, Dinajpur, in default to suffer further simple imprisonment for 1(one) week. The contemnor is directed to surrender before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinajpur immediately after receiving a copy of this order by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinajpur, failing which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate shall secure arrest of the contemnor to serve the sentence as imposed by this Court. .....Mohammad Harun-Or-Rashid =VS= Syed Jahangir Alam, (Civil), 2023(2) [15 LM (AD) 390] ....View Full Judgment

Civil Contempt: Civil contempt is typically associated with actions that interfere with the proper functioning of a court or its orders. This can include:
Disobeying Court Orders: When a person or entity fails to comply with a court order, they may be found in contempt. This could involve ignoring injunctions, restraining orders, or other directives issued by the court.
Disrupting Court Proceedings: Actions that disrupt the proceedings of the court, such as disrespectful behavior, refusing to testify, or interfering with the administration of justice, can lead to charges of civil contempt.
Refusing to Pay a Court-Ordered Debt: If an individual refuses to pay a monetary judgment as ordered by the court, they could be held in contempt until compliance. .....Mohammad Harun-Or-Rashid =VS= Syed Jahangir Alam, (Civil), 2023(2) [15 LM (AD) 390] ....View Full Judgment

Criminal Contempt: Criminal contempt involves actions that are seen as an affront to the dignity and authority of the court. It is often more punitive in nature and can include actions such as:
Open Disobedience: Engaging in actions that openly defy the authority of the court, such as shouting insults at the judge, making false statements under oath, or physically threatening court personnel.
Contemptuous Publications: Publishing materials or statements that tend to bring the court into disrepute or undermine public confidence in the judicial system. This can include slanderous or scandalous comments about judges, parties, or the court itself.
Failure to Appear: Refusing to appear in court when summoned, often seen as a direct challenge to the court's authority. .....Mohammad Harun-Or-Rashid =VS= Syed Jahangir Alam, (Civil), 2023(2) [15 LM (AD) 390] ....View Full Judgment

Contempt of Courts Act, 2013 Section 2(3), 2(6), 2(8) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 Section 561A Contemnor, Mr. Sohel Rana guilty of gross contempt of Court although exonerate the contemnor— It is not the case of the appellant that he misunderstood the order of the High Court Division or there is ambiguity therein. Because, he did not say a single word that the court’s order was unclear and ambiguous. —Exonerate the contemnor, Mr. Sohel Rana. Nevertheless, it is crucial to issue a strong admonition, underscoring the significance of adhering strictly to directives from the highest court in the country. It is our expectation that this incident serves as a lesson for all judicial officers, reaffirming the principle that the authority of the judiciary must be respected and upheld at all times.
Since this is the First Offence of the appellant and he has solemnly promised never to do any act of omission in defiance of or in disobedience to any order of the Supreme Court Appellate Division has taken a view and seriously censor and warn him for his conduct and if he repeat such kind of act in future he will be severely dealt with. In the light of the above observations, this appeal is disposed of. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court Division is hereby set aside. .....Sohel Rana =VS= The State, (Criminal), 2024(1) [16 LM (AD) 14] ....View Full Judgment

Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972
Article 108, 112, 103(2)(C) r/w
Contempt of Courts Act, 2013
Section 2(3), 2(6), 2(8)
Contempt of Court— Appellate Division is concerned in the instant case relates to violation and disobedience of the Court’s order, which in essence means lowering the dignity of the Court or making comments calculated to undermine public confidence in the judges and the justice delivery system. —The contemnors-respondents are hereby exonerated from the charge of contempt of court. Appellate Division strongly caution that in future not only the present contemnor-respondents but also all the authorities, executive and judicial, in the Republic shall be careful to ensure the compliance of the judgment and order of both the Divisions of the Supreme Court in totally. .....Md. Nurunnabi Bhuiyan =VS= Md. Abdullah Al Masud Chowdhury, (Civil), 2024(1) [16 LM (AD) 80] ....View Full Judgment

Facebook Status– We believe that the contemnor will not commit such an offence again. However, he admits the fact that he has committed the offence and thus the damage of bringing the Court and the administration of justice to disrepute has been done. The two items published by the contemnor in the social media, namely Facebook are a direct affront to the constitutional authority of the Honourable Chief Justice and the Supreme Court and had the effect of lowering the dignity of the position of the Honourable Chief Justice and the Supreme Court. Evidently the contemnor achieved his intended goal as can be seen by the posts of his followers who apparently supported his views and applauded his comments.
At the time of issuing notice upon the contemnor on 12.08.2020,he was directed not to appear before any Bench of the Supreme Court from that date until his appearance in court on 20.08.20. He has thus suffered the inability to exercise his privilege of appearing before the Supreme Court for nine days.
We find that the contemnor has admitted his guilt. However, in view of his apology and assurance that he will never commit such offence again, and the fact that he has refrained from appearing before any Bench of the Supreme Court as ordered by this Court, we are not inclined to take the matter any further. This contempt proceeding is disposed of. ...Government of Bangladesh =VS= Syed Mamun Mahbub, (Civil), 2020 [9 LM (AD) 674] ....View Full Judgment