TOPIC NAME :- CONTEMPT OF COURT OF KINDS

SUBJECT NAME :- PRACTICAL TRAINING

SEMESTER 3 YEAR (LL.B)

PROJECT SUBMITTED TO:-PROF. NITYA RADHAKRISHNAN

STUDENT NAME:- RAHUL GAJANAN TANDEL

ROLL NO :- 51

DATE :- 09-JUN-2021

SIGNATURE OF INTERNAL FACULTY:-

SIGNATURE OF EXTERNAL FACULTY: -

Page | 1
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This project would not have been possible without the fruitful guidance of
PROF. NITYA RADHAKRISHNAN, in charge of subject PRACTICAL
TRAINING, her sincere efforts in explaining the subject and related topic helped
us to be familiar with the subject.
I am thankful to madam to give clear guidance on the vast subject and important
pillar of the law and make ability to clear knowledge about it.

Page | 2
 CONTENT

Sr No. Content Page No. Remark

1 Contempt of Court 4
2 Definition 4
3 Types of contempt of courts 4
4 Case Law 8

5 Conclusion 10
6 Reference 10

Page | 3
CONTEMPT OF COURT :
The Courts are the ultimate pedestal in the Country upon which justice is delivered
through the beacon of due process. In simple terms, contempt of Court is the act of disrespecting
or being defiant towards the Court of law, including the judges. It refers to any actions which
defy a court's authority, cast disrespect on a court, or impede the ability of the court to perform
its function.
In India, the offence of contempt of court is committed when an individual either
disobeys a court order to a certain degree (known as civil contempt), or when a person says or
does any act which scandalizes or prejudices, or interferes with judicial proceedings and the
administration of justice (also known as criminal contempt). Contempt in India, can be punished
with fine or imprisonment, or both.

DEFINITION :
Article 129 declares that the supreme court as a “Court of record” and that it shall have all the
powers of a court of record including the power to punish for its contempt of itself. 

Similarly, Article 215 declares High courts as a “Court of record” and that it shall have all the
powers of such a court including the powers to punish for contempt for itself.

Power to punish for contempt of both the High court and the Supreme Court has been given by
the Constitution as well as by Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 

TYPES OF CONTEMPT OF COURTS :

Section 2(A) of The Contempt of courts Act,1971 , provides that contempt of court means civil
contempt or criminal contempt .
contempt of court classified mainly in two categories
1) Civil contempt of courts
2) Criminal contempt of Court

Page | 4
The willful disobedience to the order of court is considered civil contempt, while the
scandalizing or lowering the authority of the court in the public eye is considered criminal
contempt. The classification or categorization of contempt of court into Civil and criminal are
not closed. There are several contempt which do not fall in any of them. for example, undue
delay in pronouncing the order by a judge or judge coming late to the court by amount to
contempt of court, but they are not covered exactly by the definition of classification of contempt
in the act .

1) Civil contempt-
According to section 2 (b) of The Contempt of court Act, 1971, civil contempt means "willful
disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction , order, writ or other process of a court or willful
breach of an undertaking given to the Court ."
Thus Civil contempt consist of disobeying the orders and process of the court .Civil contempt
involves only the willful disobedience of the courts order or breach of undertaking given to the
court. The purpose of the proceeding for the Civil contempt is not only to punish the container
but also to exercise enforcement and obedience to the order of the court .

civil contempt serves two purposes -

1) Vindication of the public interest by punishment of contemptuous conduct; and
2) coercion to compel the container to do what the court requires of him.

To constitutes 'civil contempt' the following things are required to be proved :

A) there is disobedience of the order, decree etc. of the court or breach of undertaking given to
the court ;and
B) the disobedience of Breach Is Willful.

for civil contempt it is necessary that order which has been disobeyed must have been passed by
the court having jurisdiction to pass such order. If the order has been passed without jurisdiction ,
it is not binding on the party against which it has been Passed by the and therefore disobedience

Page | 5
of such order will not amount to contempt of Court. The burden to prove that the court has no
jurisdiction to pass the order lies on the person who alleges it.
It has been made clear that when the Courts order to do something or not to do something, it is
necessary for a person to comply with that order without any doubt or hesitation in his mind. The
excuse that he should consult the higher authorities before complying with the order of the Court
can be of no avail when he is asked to show cause why he should not be committed for contempt
of Court. No official superior can take any action against any office subordinate for complying
with the Court's order. Sometimes the superior officers themselves may be held liable for the
contempt if they give instructions contrary to the order of the Court.

If a party who has full knowledge of the order of the court or is conscious and aware of the
consequences and implications of the court's order, ignores it or acts in violation of the courts
order, it must be held that disobedience is willful.
Whether the disobedience has been wilful or not It is an issue to be decided by the court, taking
into account the facts the circumstances of the case.

2) Criminal contempt -
According to Section 2(c) of The Contempt of courts Act, 1971 , "criminal contempt" means the
publication ( whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs ,or by visible representations, or
otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other Act whatsoever which -

I) scandalize or tends to scandalize, or lower or tends to lower, the authority of any Court ;or
II) prejudice or interfere or tents to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding ; or
III) interface or tends to interfere with or obstructs, tends to obstruct, the administration of justice
in any other manner.

Criminal contempt is a conduct directed against dignity of Court.

Criminal contempt is directed against the power and dignity of the court. The definition of
criminal contempt is wide enough to include any act of a person which would tend to interfere
with the administration of justice or with which would lower to the authority of the court.

Page | 6
To constitute the criminal contempt it is not necessary that the publication or other acts should
have actually resulted in scandalizing or lowering the authority of the court but it is enough that
the act is likely to result in scandalizing. Thus the offense of contempt is complete by mere
attempt and does not depend on actual deflection of Justice .
'Scandalize' connotes to speak falsely, or maliciously, to bring into approach ,dishonor, disgrace,
to offend the feelings, conscious or property of an action. ' scandalize' also means to offend a
moral feeling, and to make a public scandal of, to utter false or malicious reports of a person's
conduct, slander, or to bring same or discredit or to disgrace . We can say that the disgraceful
word scandalize means the defamatory , derogatory, false malicious disgraceful statements
regarding the persons as Judges.
It is for the court to decide whether or not the publication or act is likely to scandalize or lower
the authority of the court or interfere with due course of any judicial proceeding for
administration of justice.
The publication act will be taken as criminal contempt, if it has resulted in scandalizing the
authority of court or interference with the due course of judicial proceedings or interfering the
administration of justice in any matter.

Third Party Contempt

A third party to the proceeding may also be guilty of contempt of court if they have a part to play
in the offence.

Limitation
According to Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 the limitation period for
initiating contempt proceedings is of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to
have been committed.

Punishment for Contempt of Court

High Court and Supreme Court are bestowed with the power to punish for the contempt of the
court.
Under Section 12 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971, a contempt of court can be punished with
simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend

Page | 7
to two thousand rupees, or with both.
In civil cases if the court considers that a fine will not meet the ends of justice and that a sentence
of imprisonment is necessary shall, instead of sentencing him to simple imprisonment, direct that
he be detained in a civil prison for such period not exceeding six months as it may think fit.
An accused may also be discharged or the punishment awarded may be remitted on apology
being made by the accused to the satisfaction of the court. An apology is not supposed to be
rejected merely on the ground that it is qualified or conditional if the accused makes it bona fide.

Defences allowed in Contempt proceeding

Clause (b) of Section 13 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971 that was introduced recently by 2006
amendment, allows the accused to raise the defence of justification by truth of such contempt, if
the court is satisfied that it is in public interest and the request for invoking the said defence is
bonafide.
However, no court shall impose a sentence under this Act for a contempt of court unless it is
satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends substantially
to interfere with the due course of justice.

Purpose of Contempt of Court

The purpose of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the majesty and dignity of law. If by
contentious words or writings the common man is led to lose his respect for the judiciary, then
the confidence reposed in the courts is rudely shaken and the offender needs to be punished. In
essence of law of contempt is the protector of the seat of justice more than the person sitting of
the judge sitting in that seat.

CASE LAW :
The Prashant Bhushan case
In  Re: Prashant Bhushan & Anr., the Supreme Court held Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan
guilty of Contempt. It held the 2 tweets by the Senior Advocate to be in Contempt of court
because it scandalised the authority of the court. The court relied on the judgement given
in Brahma Prakash Sharma And Others vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh (1953) in which it ruled

Page | 8
that scandalising the court is when there is an attack on an individual judge or the court as a
whole with or without reference to particular cases, casting unwarranted and defamatory
aspersions on the character of the judges. This according to the court is necessary because it
creates distrust in the mind of the people and “impairs the confidence of people in the courts
which is of prime importance.
It further relied on the judgement given in C. K. Daphtary & Ors vs. O. P. Gupta & Ors
(1971) in which it ruled that any publication which was calculated to interfere with the due
course of justice or administration of the law would amount to Contempt of Court. It said that a
scurrilous attack on a judge, for a judgement or past conduct, has in our country the inevitable
effect of undermining the confidence of the public in the judiciary and if confidence in judiciary
goes, administration of justice definitely suffers.
 According to the court, the first part of the Tweet stated that, “At a time when he (Chief
Justice) keeps the Supreme Court in lockdown mode, denying citizens the Fundamental
Rights to access to justice.”
Court held this to be contemptuous because according to the Court the tweet criticised the Chief
Justice of India in his capacity as the Chief Justice of India and not as an individual. The court
ruled that the tweet had the tendency to shake the confidence of the public in the Judiciary and
this according to the Court undermines the dignity and authority of the administration of Justice.
It further said that an attack on the Supreme Court not only reduces the confidence of an ordinary
litigant but also of other judges in the country in its highest Court.
 The Court for his 2nd tweet court said that the tweet gives the impression
that the Supreme Court has played a particular role in the destruction of democracy in the
last 6 years and this according to the Court is the criticism of Judiciary as an institution
and shakes the faith of the people in the Judiciary.
The court ruled that an attempt to shake the foundation of Constitutional democracy i.e. the
Judiciary has to be “dealt with an iron hand”. For the Court, the tweets have the effect of
destabilising the Foundation of Indian Democracy.

Page | 9
CONCLUSION :
Civil contempt is necessary as wilful disobedient litigants who ignore the orders of the court
cannot be let-off otherwise it would seriously affect the administration of justice and trust of
people in the judiciary. Trust, faith and confidence of the citizens in the judiciary is sine qua
non for the existence of Rule of Law. However, criminal contempt according to experts should
be rationalised if not completely removed from the statute. This is because it has the tendency to
be used to curb Freedom of Speech and expression under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.
According to Arun Shourie and Adv. Prashant Bhushan “Scandalising the authority of Court”
under Criminal Contempt, violates freedom of Speech and is manifestly arbitrary. According to
them, the language is vague enough to encompass within its sweep legitimate criticism as well,
thus violating the Doctrine of Overbreadth. For them, it is rooted in colonial assumption and
objects and has no place in a democracy.

REFERENCES :
https://www.advocatekhoj.com/
https://indiankanoon.org/
https://www.lexology.com/

Page | 10