M.D. JAIN vs BHAGYAVATHI — Crl.A. No. 2133/2009

Case under Section II-E. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010222802007

Filing Date

02-Aug-2007

Registration No

Crl.A. No. 2133/2009

Diary Number

22280/2007

Order Date

26-Jul-2017

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Neutral Citation

2017 INSC 673

Disposal Type

Disposed Off

Last updated 01-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section II-E

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M.D. JAIN

    Adv. AP & J CHAMBERS

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.BHAGYAVATHI

    Adv. V. N. RAGHUPATHY RAVI P. WADHWANI TAPESH KUMAR SINGH (Dead / Retired / Elevated)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-Jul-2017

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 26-Jul-2017

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 26-Jul-2017

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi

  5. 23-Apr-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 26-Aug-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 13-Nov-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 14-Sep-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 10-Sep-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 29-Aug-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 04-Aug-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 07-Jul-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 28-Apr-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 08-Apr-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 05-Mar-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 06-Feb-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 22-Oct-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 20-Aug-2007

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 02-Aug-2007

    Case filed

    Registration No. Crl.A. No. 2133/2009

  20. [ 2017 INSC 673 ]

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: M.D. Jain appealed against the High Court's denial of his discharge in contempt proceedings arising from allegations that he had tampered with court documents in collusion with court staff. A CBI investigation (dated 13.04.2005) found no material or circumstantial evidence against Jain and concluded the complaints by his former wife Bhagyavathi were false. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's impugned order and allowed the appeal, noting the High Court had mistakenly believed the CBI inquiry was directed only at court staff, when Jain was actually the primary accused. The Court requested the High Court to reconsider the matter afresh in light of the CBI report exonerating Jain. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case