The precise breach or breaches of the order complained of should be set out in the notice of motion itself

In Jayantilal Hiralal & Co. Vs Waman Narayen Velinkar 1932 SCC OnLine Bom 121 it is ruled as under; “Precise charge should be mentioned in the Notice of Motion – mentioning in the affidavit is not sufficient – The form given in Oswald’s Contempt book should be followed – Notice of Motion Defective – Dismissed with cost. The next point taken by the Advocate-General is that the charge ought to have been specifically set out in the notice of motion. It is merely stated in the notice of motion that the Court will be asked for an order to commit the respondent to jail for contempt of the Court's order. What the particular contempt alleged is not stated. It is contended in answer by Mr. Engineer that sufficient particularity as to the nature of the charge is given in para 9 of the affidavit of Waman Narayan Velinkar elated 11th December 1931, and that notice is given by the notice of motion that affidavit will be relied upon. His submission is that all that is required is that the respondent shall be given notice of the precise charges against him in order that he may have an opportunity of knowing them and of 25 meeting them if he can. There are some useful observations on the question of giving precise notice of the charge in Russell, J's judgment in Bat Moolbai v. Chunilal Pitamber (3) to which I have already referred at p. 633, where that learned Judge points out that proceedings for contempt of Court are in the nature of a criminal offence, and that precise charges should accordingly be framed. In my opinion, the precise breach or breaches of the order complained of should be set out in the notice of motion itself and the respondent should not be left to ascertain, if he can from the affidavit relied upon in support what the charges are. It may well be that in para 9 of the affidavit in support notice of the breaches complained of has been given in this particular case. But in my judgment, a respondent ought not to be left to gather, if he can, from the terms of the affidavit in support what is the precise nature of the charge brought against him. In this connexion it is useful to refer to the form of notice of motion for contempt for breach of a judgment or order, which is set out in App. 2, at p. 272, in Oswald on Contempt. It will be seen that form contemplates the precise nature of the breach of the judgment or order being set out in the notice of motion. I hold therefore that the notice of motion in the case is defective. Even if the proceedings had been in order in this case, in the exercise of my decretion I should have declined to do so. In the result this notice of motion will be dismissed with costs. 26 The precise breach or breaches of the order complained of should be set out in the notice of motion itself and the respondent should not be left to ascertain.”