The Calcutta Weekly Notes Law Notes and Notes of Cases of the Calcutta High Court and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and the English Law Courts Monday March 9 1925

On the aplication of the Advpcate-General proceedings tempt were taken by the High Court the Editor and Manager and the inter and Publisher of the Patrika. [...] Opposed to the view of the Calcutta High Court is that of the Bombay and Madras High Courts which haveeld that they have ample authority to protect the Courts subordinate to them against contempt; in other words they have the powers of the King's Bench Division of the High Court of England which are as unrestricted as the powers of the High Court to punish for contempt of its own authority. [...] After the decisihn of the Calcutta High Court the only thing that the Legislature was called upon to do was to remove any doubt as to the powers of the High Courts of Judicature in regard to the protection of the subordinate Courts from contempt but instead of doing that the bill proposes to curtail the existing jurisdiction of the High Courts as superior Courts of record as regards contempt of th [...] 173 secondly the contempt prceedings in the High Court arose out of the prosecution going on at that time in the Court of the Magistrate at Barisal against Girindro Mohan Das and others but the decision of the High Court is reported in the Calcutta Weekly Notes under the cause title In re the Amrita Bazar Patrika and in the Indian Law Reports as Legal Remembrancer v. Moti Lal Ghosh. [...] It may be noteworthy that the application for the issue of a writ of contempt as originally tiled purported to be made by the Legal Rmembrancer but the Court refused to entetain the application on the ground that the Legal Remembrancer had no locus standi in the Crown side of the High Court and therupon the application was made by the AdvocatGeneral on behalf of His Excellency the Gove