“Jesus Christ Taught Us To Forgive A Wrongdoer": Meghalaya High Court Closes Criminal Contempt Proceedings Against Don Bosco School Management
However, the Court directed the school management to strictly comply with its earlier order, ensuring that the reconstruction follows heritage guidelines and that no third-party rights are created without the Court’s permission.
The Meghalaya High Court disposed of criminal contempt proceedings against the Board members of the Don Bosco technical School, Shillong, who were responsible for demolition of St. Anthony’s Lower Primary School, Shillong, during the Christmas vacation.
The Court found their explanation not wholly convincing but, considering their status as respectable Christian priests of the Salesians of Don Bosco Order and their genuine remorse, decided to forgive them instead of imposing punishment.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice I. P. Mukherji and Justice W. Diengdoh observed, “In the exercise of contempt jurisdiction, we have the option of punishing the alleged contemnors or forgiving them. The prerogative of forgiving even an unacceptable act is with the Court.”
The Court noted, “The affidavits state that the alleged contemnors have the greatest respect for this Court. They had and have no intention of disobeying the orders passed by it and every intention of obeying them. They tendered an unqualified apology and prayed for forgiveness.”
The Petitioner was represented by Advocate R. Pahsyntiew, while Advocate General A. Kumar appeared for the Respondents.
Brief Facts
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) arises from the issue of the demolition of St. Anthony’s Lower Primary School in Don Bosco Square, Shillong (School).
In an earlier order, the Court directed the Board Management of the School (Board), the contemnors herein, to file affidavits addressing its query on why the school was demolished during the Christmas vacation. The Court further questioned why the urgent need for demolition was not brought to its attention and why permission was not sought from the Vacation Bench before carrying out the demolition.
The affidavits filed by the Board stated that the building was allegedly found to be tilting. Upon seeking advice from a contractor, they were advised that it should be demolished to prevent any danger to life and property. Acting on this advice, the building was demolished. Since the contractor deemed the danger to be imminent, the Court was not approached before carrying out the demolition.
Reasoning of the Court
The Court stated that it did not find the explanation given by the Board wholly convincing, regarding the demotion of the building. However, the Court noted that the members of the Board were respectable Christian priests belonging to the Salesians of Don Bosco Order and running the heritage institution.
The Bench said, “Jesus Christ taught us to forgive a wrongdoer. He preached that the satisfaction one gets out of forgiveness is much more than what is reached by inflicting the pain of punishment. To our knowledge, Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism also have similar precepts. It becomes more relevant when the wrongdoer is genuinely remorseful and pleads for forgiveness. We also appreciate the pleasing and submissive manner in which Mr. Chakrawarty presented the part of the affidavits of the alleged contemnors, praying for forgiveness.”
The Court noted that, given the institution's status and its management's standing in society, along with the sincerity of their regret and request for forgiveness over the demolition, it decided to dispose of the criminal contempt application. However, the Court directed the school management to strictly comply with its earlier order which reads thus:
“The building has already been demolished. The students have been relocated to another place. It is a premier school in Shillong. The building restructuring plan has been approved by the Meghalaya Urban Development Authority. According to the respondent authorities, on a combined view of the square, the statue of the Don Bosco and the façade of the school facing it, the building should be declared as heritage. Considering all the above facts, we permit the school management to rebuild but the plan and architecture of the building should be more or similar to the demolished one. If the approved plan has to be revised, it may be so done and duly approved by the Meghalaya Urban Development Authority. The management may proceed with the reconstruction work but shall not create any third party rights by transfer, creating encumbrance or parting with possession of the property without the leave of the Court.”
Cause Title: Rapheal Warji v. State of Meghalaya & Ors. (Neutral Citation No. 2025:MLHC:187-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates R. Pahsyntiew, W.G.R. Mihsill
Respondents: Advocate General A. Kumar, Additional Advocate General K. Khan, Senior Advocate S. Chakrawarty, Government Advocate I. Lyngwa, Advocate P.A. Dohkrut
Click here to read/download Order
