Contempt of Court
• In India the SC, HC and Various subordinate courts are established for
the administration of justice.
• The judges who are engaged in the administration of justice should
have authority to discharge their duties without fear or favour.
• The judgments , orders , writs or other processes of a court should be
obeyed by the people.
• Any one who disobeys the orders of the court or shows disrespect to
the authority of court should be punished for the wrong of contempt.
• If the person who disobeys the orders of the court or shows
disrespect to the authority of court is not punished , the majesty and
dignity of the law courts cannot be maintained.
• The constitution of India declares that the supreme Court and High
Courts shall be ‘court of records’ . The Supreme court and every HC
shall have the power to punish for contempt of itself . When there is
contempt of a subordinate court , the High Court can punish the
contemnor.
• In India , the law relating to punishment for contempt is contained in
the contempt of courts Act , 1971
Contempt of court- Sec 2 (a)
• Sec 2(a) of the Act defines ‘Contempt of Court’. It means ‘civil contempt’ or criminal
contempt’.
• Civil Contempt :- means wilful disobedience to any judgment , decree , direction , order or
other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
• Criminal Contempt – means the publication (by words spoken or written or by signs or by
visible representation or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any act whatsoever
which.
i) Scandalises or tends to scandalise or lowers or tend s to lower the authority of any court
ii) Prejudices or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial
proceeding
iii) Interferes or tends to interfere with or obstructs or tends to obstruct the administration
of justice in any other manner.
• By virtue of sec 10 :- Every High Court shall have the jurisdiction and power
to punish any person who is guilty of contempt of courts subordinate to it
as if the contempt is of itself.
• However , a HC shall not take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have
been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it if such contempt is
an offence punishable under sections 175, 178, 179, 180 or 228 of IPC.
• If any other contempt of subordinate court is committed by a person , the
High Court can proceed against him on a reference made to it by the
subordinate court.
• By virtue of sec 12 :- a contempt of court may be punishable with simple
imprisonment for a term which may be extend to six months, or with fine
which may extend to two thousand rupees or with both.
• If the accused makes an apology to the satisfaction of the court, the court
may discharge the accused.
Case laws
• EMS Namboodiripad v T.N Nambiar- AIR 1970 SC 2015
• Delhi judicial services Association , Tis Hasari Court v. State of Gujarat and others, AIR 1971
SC 2176
• Mohd Aslam v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 548
• In Re . Vinay Chandra Misra –AIR 1995 SC 2348
• Supreme Court Bar Assocoation v UOI , AIR 1998 SC 1895
• Daroga Singh v. B.K Pandey, 2004, 5 SCC 26
• (Bank of Baroda v. Sadruddin Hasan Daya, 2004,1 SCC 360, Pradip Kumar Biswas v.
Subrata Das, 2004, 4 SCC 573):- SC held that the power to punish for contempt must always
be exercised consciously , wisely and with circumspection. The purpose of contempt
jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of the courts of law.
• T.N Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Ashok Khot, 2006, 5 SCC 1
• Chandra Prakash Singh Chauhan v. State of UP. 2011, 15 SCC 235
• Arun Kumar Yadav v. State of UP, 2013, 14 SCC 127
Defences In Civil Contempt
. No knowledge of order:-
The general principle is that a person cannot be held guilty of contempt in
respect of an order of which he claims to be unaware.
it can be successfully pleaded in defense that the certified copy of the order
was not formally served on the alleged contemnor.
. Disobedience or breach was not willful:-
It can be pleaded that although disobedience or breach of the order has taken
place but it was due to accidental, administrative or other reasons beyond the
control of the party concerned.
. Order disobeyed is vague or ambiguous:-
If the order passed by court is vague or ambiguous or its not specific or
complete, it would be a defense in the contempt .
. Compliance of the order is impossible:-
In proceedings for civil contempt, it would be a valid defense that the
compliance of the order is impossible.
. The order has been passed without jurisdiction.
If the order whose contempt is alleged, has been passed by a court which
had no jurisdiction to pass it, the disobedience or violation would not
amount to contempt of court for the reason that the order passed without
jurisdiction is a void order and binds nobody.
In Dr. H. Puninder Singh vs. K.K. Sethi, the Supreme Court has held that if
there is any stay order passed by the Appellate Court, the contempt court
cannot proceed. However, if no interim order application is passed by the
Appellate Court, the court can proceed and the order of the original court
should be complied with subject to any order passed by the Appellate Court
at the final stage.
• Defences Against Criminal Contempt:-
. Innocent publication and distribution of matter.
S.3 deals with this defense. If a criminal contempt is initiated against a person on the
ground that he is responsible for publication or for distribution of publication which
prejudices or interferes with the pending proceedings, the contemnor may take the
following steps:
(a) he may plead under S. 3(1) that at the time of publication, he had no reasonable
ground for believing that the proceeding was pending.
(b) he may plead under S.3(2) that at the time of publication, no such proceeding was
pending.
(c) he may plead under S.3(3) that at the time of distribution of publication, he had no
reasonable ground for believing that the matter (published or distributed by him)
contained or was likely to contain any material which interfered or obstructed the
pending proceeding or administration of justice.
. Fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings:-
S. 4 of the Act provides that a person should not be held guilty of Contempt of
Court for publishing a fair and accurate report of any judicial proceedings or
any stage thereof.
. Fair criticism of judicial act:-
S.5 provides that a person shall not be guilty of criminal contempt for
publishing any fair comment on the merits of any case which has been finally
decided.
. Bonafide complain against the presiding officer of a subordinate court.:-
S.6 provides that a person shall not be guilty of contempt of court in respect
of any statement made by him by way of complaint in good faith concerning
the presiding officer of any sub-ordinate court to the High Court or to the
Court to which he is sub-ordinate. The protection of this section will be
available only when it is proved that the complaint was made in good faith.
. Justification by truth:-
The amended S.13(2) provides that the Court may permit justification by truth
as a valid defense in any proceeding for criminal contempt if it is satisfied that
it is in public interest. Thus, truth is now a defense if it is in the public interest
and bonafide.
. Defamation of the judge personally:-
any personal attack upon the judge unconnected with the office he holds, is
dealt with under the ordinary rules of Libel and Slander.
Period of Limitation:-
- Section 20 provides that no court shall initiate contempt proceedings
either on its own notions or otherwise after the expiry of one year from
the date on which contempt is alleged to have been committed.
• Remedy Against The Order of Punishment:-
- Apology
- Appeal:- Section 19(4) provides for the period of limitation for preferring
an appeal.
- 30 days to division bench and 60 days to supreme court
• Procedure To Be Adopted In Cases of Contempt In The Face of The Court:-
Section 14 deals with contempt in the face of the Supreme Court and High
Courts and it provides that whenever it appears to the Supreme Court and the
High Courts that a person appears to have committed contempt in its presence
or hearing the court may cause such person to be detained in custody.
And shall at any time before the rising of the court on the same day or as early
as possible, thereafter :
1. Cause him to be informed in writing of the contempt with which he is
charged.
2. Afford him an opportunity to make his defense in respect of the charge.
3. After taking such evidence as may be offered by such person and after
hearing him proceed either forthwith or after adjournment to determine the
matter of the charge.
4. Make such order for the punishment or discharge of such person as may be
necessary.
• Procedure of Criminal Contempt Committed Outside The Court:-
Criminal Contempt committed outside the Court, in other words, other than in
the face of the Court, is known as Constitutive Contempt. Section 15(1) deals
with cognizance of criminal contempt by courts of record whereas Section
15(2) deals with criminal contempt of sub-ordinate courts.
-Section 15(1) provides that cognizance for criminal contempt can be taken
by the Supreme Court and High Courts in the following manner:
i. On its own motion
ii. On the motion of the Advocate General
iii. On the motion of any other person, with the consent, in writing, of the
Advocate General.
iv. On the motion of such law officer in relation to the High Court for the Union
Territory of Delhi as the central government may notify.
• Section 15(2) provides that in case of criminal contempt of a sub-ordinate
court, the concerned High Court may take action in the following manner:
i. On the reference made to it by the sub-ordinate court.
ii. On the motion made by the Advocate General.
iii. On the motion made by such law officer in relation to a Union Territory as
the Central Government may specify.
• Bar On Private Persons
Section 15 bars the private individuals to file without consent of the
Advocate General. The purpose of barring a private person from filing
contempt procedure without the consent of Attorney General is to save the
court's time from being wasted in frivolous complaints.
• In Hari Kishan vs. Narutham Das Shashtri, the SC held that the purpose of
barring private person from filing criminal contempt is to prevent the courts
from being flooded with frivolous motions in order to serve personal interest
or grudge.
