Summary
The Court set aside an investigating officer’s civil-contempt conviction after accepting his genuine unconditional apology and plausible explanation for arrest under a subsequently added charge. On the facts it found no wilful attempt to breach the anticipatory-bail order, while observing that seeking court modification would have been appropriate.
Issues
- Whether the arrest amounted to wilful disobedience and whether the unconditional apology should be accepted.
Held
- The Section 307 charge was restored following further investigation on superior instructions. The officer plausibly understood the earlier protection as confined to offences then reflected in the bail order. Although approaching the court was preferable, the Court found no intentional overstepping here. (¶ 2–4)
- The sincere unconditional apology was relevant to that bona fide explanation. In civil contempt the court must explain refusal to accept an apology; these circumstances warranted its acceptance. (¶ 5–7)
Result
Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside on acceptance of the written unconditional apology. No general authority to arrest despite bail orders declared.