The IGP said he would appeal against the verdict. "I'm yet to receive any documents from the High Court...After getting the copy of the verdict, I'll appeal against the verdict as per law," the IGP told the news agency.

The court also fined three traffic policemen on the same charge, but exonerated two others.

Sergeant Shoebur Rahman was fined Tk 1,000, in default, he will have to suffer two months' imprisonment while Sergeant Mustafizur Rahman and Russel Arafat were fined Tk 500 each, in default, they are to suffer one month's imprisonment.

Traffic Inspector Obaidul Huq and Sergeant Hafiz Mahmud were exonerated from the charge.

"We find it difficult to accept the IGP's apology... apology may only be considered depending on the circumstances. After considering the facts and circumstances, we hold IGP Shahudul Huq guilty of gross contempt of court," the High Court division bench comprising Justice M A Matin and Justice Syed Refat Ahmed observed in its judgement.

The judgement was delivered in the open court, but the IGP was not present, as the court earlier exempted him from appearing in person on the grounds of his preoccupation with the 'Police Week'.

Identifying the IGP as contemner, the court observed that it is beyond any reasonable doubt that the IGP was liable for gross misconduct against the judge as well as the court.

Referring to the clarification submitted by the IGP as asked by the court upon a suo moto rule in connection with a contempt case against five police sergeants, the court said that in fact, the IGP had supported the action of the traffic policemen who misbehaved with the judge.

The Court had issued the contempt rule upon the IGP for his written comments and remarks while replying to certain queries in connection with the contempt case against the traffic policemen in August last year.

The sergeants did not show due respect to a sitting judge of the High Court at Farmgate on his way to court in a flag car in June last year.

In his written reply to the High Court, the IGP had said that by issuing the contempt rule against the traffic policemen, the judge had become liable to be prosecuted under the criminal law on charges of wrongful confinement, abetment, prejudicial act, obstructing public servant in discharging public function and threatening a public servant.

The High Court in its suo moto contempt rule wanted to know from the IGP whether or not traffic police personnel were given training to salute a judge when he or she passes in a flag car. It also wanted to know whether or not a traffic policeman should give priority to a judge's car over those of subordinate officials.

The judgement, dismissing the IGP's clarification relating to the options of saluting the judge's flag car, said the flag, inscribed with the insignia of the Supreme Court, must henceforth be shown due respect by the policemen.

Soon after the judgement, Barrister Shamsuddin Chowdhury Manik, an additional judge of the High Court, who was the victim of police dishonour, told UNB that he was very happy with the judgement. The dignity of the Supreme Court has been upheld, he said.

Barrister Mainul Hosein appeared for the IGP.