Recently, the Delhi High Court initiated contempt proceedings against Nitin Bansal, following an incident where he displayed a firearm on his office table during a local commissioner’s inspection.

The bench headed by Justice Subramonium Prasad remarked that ''There was no justification for placing a weapon on the table when the Local Commissioner arrived, highlighting that the presence of the firearm alone could intimidate anyone present''

Case Brief:

The case stems from a petition seeking an interim order to prevent Ashok Bansal from disposing of 30,000 tons of industrial coal material, which was allegedly acquired by her husband through his proprietorship firm.

During the inspection, the local commissioner’s report revealed that Nitin Bansal, along with Sonu Gupta, was present at the site. The report described how Bansal became aggressive, pulled out a firearm, and placed it on the office table.

To this, the court directed Nitin Bansal to appear and file an affidavit to explain the situation.

In his affidavit, Bansal explained that the weapon was an air gun, which he argued did not require a license under current regulations.

During the proceedings, he mentioned that the air gun was used to deter animals, such as monkeys and stray dogs, around the factory, which was located in a remote area. Bansal also claimed that the air gun had been on the table before the Local Commissioner’s arrival.

However, the court expressed skepticism over his defense, stating that even if the air gun had been there beforehand, its presence during the commissioner’s visit could still be seen as intimidating. The court also pointed out that an air gun without pellets would be ineffective in deterring animals.

Based on the local commissioner’s report and statements from the ASI, the court concluded that there was a prima facie case of interference with the administration of justice, potentially amounting to criminal contempt. Bansal’s actions were deemed as obstructing a court-appointed official from performing her duties.

As a result, the court instructed the Registrar General to present the case records to the Chief Justice for referral to the Division Bench handling criminal contempt cases against Bansal.