Skip to main content

case study laughing gas does not escape

 In the year 1975 there is a new Court House at St. Albans with Air-conditioned. The Crown Court was sitting in the Court House for the trial of a case related to pornographic films & books. Stephen Balogh, a clerk employed by Solicitor for defence. The case dragged on & on as a result Stephen Balogh got exceedingly bored. Mr. Balogh devised a plan to release nitrous oxide (N2O) that gives an exhilarating effect when inhaled. N2O is also known as “laughing gas”. He steal half cylinder of N2O from the Hospital car parking. His plan is to put the cylinder at the inlet to the ventilating system & release the gas in the court that provide relief from the monotonous court proceeding. 

While he was going up in the roof to put the cylinder in the ventilating system an officer witnessed him. Next morning officer cautiously monitoring Mr. Balogh & waiting for the right opportunity known what he is up to. Mr. Balogh bring a briefcase with him containing a cylinder of laughing gas or N2O. officer carefully examined it & found out that Mr. Balogh is trying to interrupt the court proceeding. Mr. Balogh charged for stealing a bottle of Nitrous Oxide from the Hospital. The matter was reported to a judge presiding in the court room 1 where Mr. Balogh accidently planting the Nitrous Oxide instead of the next door court room. The court sentenced Mr. Balogh 6 months of imprisonment for the offence of contempt of court.

Mr. Balogh appeal to the court and admitted that his behavour has been contemptible & he is asked to apologize before the bench in a hope that court show mercy on him by acquitting him. The power given to a judge under contempt in the face of court is a necessary power to maintain the dignity & authority of the court & ensure fair trial. It is to be exercised by the judge of his own motion only when it is urgent & imperative to act immediately in order to maintain the authority of the court, to prevent disorder, to enable witnesses to be free from fear, to prevent jurors from being improperly influenced & other acts that hamper court proceeding. 

The case before hand, Mr. Balogh was undoubtedly guilty of stealing the cylinder gas from the hospital. As far as contempt of court is concerned, there is no proceeding were disturbed, no trial was upset, no gas were released or in case gas were released it was diluted by air that the effect of N2O were unnoticeable. Mr. Balogh has criminal intent to disrupt the court proceeding but that is not enough as there is absence of criminal act. Balogh spend 14 days in prison & he has now apologized before the court which is sufficient to purge in contempt, in case of contempt was done in due course of Court proceeding. 

  
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more