As an AI language model, I do not have personal opinions or feelings.

However, I
can provide objective information on the topic.

Contempt of court refers to any action that defies or disrespects the authority or
dignity of a court of law. Similarly, contempt of parliament is any act that
undermines or challenges the authority of the legislative body. These actions can
lead to punishments such as fines or imprisonment.

When it comes to contempt of state governments in India, the situation is more

complicated. State governments are often accused of disrespecting the authority of
the central government or other state governments. This can lead to legal disputes,
political battles, and even violence.

There have been several high-profile cases of state governments being accused of
contempt in recent years. For example, in 2020, the Tamil Nadu government was
accused of contempt by the Madras High Court for not implementing a court order to
close down illegal slaughterhouses in the state. In another case, the Andhra
Pradesh government was accused of contempt by the Supreme Court for attempting to
remove a senior state official without following proper protocol.

Overall, contempt of state governments is a serious issue in India that can have
far-reaching consequences for the government, the judiciary, and the public.

As an AI language model, I do not have personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can

provide information regarding the relationship between contempt and freedom of
speech.

Contempt refers to the feeling of disrespect, disdain or disregard towards a person

or group of people. Freedom of speech, on the other hand, refers to the right to
express oneself without censorship or restraint.

While freedom of speech is a fundamental right, it is not an absolute right and is

subject to limitations. For example, speech that incites violence, hate speech, and
defamation are not protected under freedom of speech laws.

Contemptuous speech can potentially fall under the category of hate speech, and as
such may not be protected under freedom of speech laws. Additionally, some
countries have specific laws prohibiting contemptuous speech towards certain groups
or individuals.

In summary, while one has the right to express oneself freely, contemptuous speech
can potentially violate limitations on freedom of speech laws and may be subject to
legal consequences.

Ultimately, the impact of contempt on freedom of speech will depend on a variety of

factors, including the specific context in which speech occurs, the laws and norms
of the society in question, and the balance between individual rights and the
broader public interest.

Purging

In Black's Law Dictionary the word "purge" is given the following meaning: "To
cleanse; to clear. To clear or exonerate from some charge or imputation of guilt,
or from a contempt."
1. We are told that a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court
has expressed a view that purging process would be completed when the contemnor
undergoes the penalty vide Madan Gopal Gupta (Dr) v. Agra University [AIR 1974 All
39] ]. This is what the learned Single Judge said about it: (AIR p. 43, para 13)"In
my opinion a party in contempt purged its contempt by obeying the orders of the
court or by undergoing the penalty imposed by the court."

However, purging of contempt may refer to the process of clearing a person's record
of contempt of court charges. This can be done through compliance, apology, or
serving a sentence decided by the court. In some cases, the court may also withdraw
or suspend contempt charges if the behavior of the person improves. It is important
to note that contempt of court refers to any behavior that disrespects or
disregards the authority of the court and can result in fines, imprisonment, or
other penalties.

Narmada

The Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) was an environmental movement aimed at preventing
the displacement of thousands of people due to the construction of the Sardar
Sarovar Dam on the Narmada river. The NBA filed a petition in the Supreme Court of
India challenging the construction of the dam.

The primary issue before the court was the displacement of around two lakh people
due to the dam's construction. The NBA argued that the environmental impact of the
dam was not adequately considered, and the rehabilitation of the displaced people
was not properly carried out. They also argued that the dam's construction violated
the fundamental rights of the affected people.

The court, in its decision, recognized the concerns raised by the NBA. The court
directed the government to ensure that the environmental impact of the dam was
properly considered before construction. The court also directed the government to
ensure proper rehabilitation of all the displaced persons before the dam's
construction could be completed.

The court's decision is significant as it recognized the importance of

environmental protection and proper rehabilitation of displaced persons. The
decision also highlights the need for the government to consider the interests of
all stakeholders before undertaking any major development project.

Salil case

The appeal is preferred by the plaintiff against the judgment and order of a
division bench of the Calcutta High court allowing the appeal preferred by the
respondent/defendant. And the appeal before the High court was directed against an
order of the city civil court, Calcutta dismissing an application filed by the
defendant to set aside the ex parte decree passed against him, under Order 9 Rule
13 of the CPC
• The plaintiff/appellant filed a suit for ejecting the defendant-tenant on the
ground of default in paying rent and on the ground that the such premises are
required for his own use and occupation. The suit was posted for final hearing on
9/06/1988 -seven years after its institution.
• According to the defendanthis advocate advised him that he need not be present at
the hearing of the suit on 9/06/1988, and thereafter till the applications filed by
him under Order 14 Rule 5 and Order 6 Rule 16 Civil Procedure Code are disposed of.
On 9/06/1988, the advocate for the defendant prayed for an adjournment till the
next day. It was adjourned accordingly. On June 10, neither the advocate for the
defendant nor the defendant appeared, with the result the defendant was set ex
parte.
 Key aspects
• Order IX Rule 13
• Whether principle of the decision in Rafiq v. Munshilal (AIR 1981 SC 1400)
applies in the present case

Judgement

Hence this case was decided in the favour of the client as the advocate of the
defendant failed to perform his duty towards the court, instead of assisting the
court, he chose to be an agent of his client and tried to misguide the court. An
advocate is first the officer of the court then the advocate of his client. One
must align with these codes of conduct to maintain dignity as well as the honour of
the legal profession. Any violation of the professional ethics of an advocate will
be considered unfortunate and unrespectable.

C ravichandran case

The petitioner (an advocate) has initiated the PIL under Article 32 seeking to
issue an appropriate writ/ order/ direction restraining permanently the Bar Council
of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG), Bombay Bar Association (BBA) and the Advocates
Association of Western India (AAWI), coercing Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee , Chief
Justice of Bombay High Court, to resign from the office as Judge.
• He also sought an investigation by the CBI into the allegations made against the
Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee and if the same are found true, to direct the, Speaker,
Lok Sabha to initiate action for his removal under Article 124(4) and (5) read with
Article 218 of the Constitution of India and Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968
• ThisCourton24-3-
1995issuednoticetoBCMG,BBAandAAWIonlyandrejectedtheprayerforinterim direction to
the President of India and the Union of India not to give effect to the resignation
by the Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee. SC also issued notice to the Attorney General
for India and the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA). The BBA
filed a counter-affidavit through its President, Shri Iqbal Mahomedali Chagla.
•
ShriF.S.Nariman,learnedSeniorCounselappearedfortheBBAandShriHarishN.Salve,learnedSe
nior Counsel, appeared for AAWI, the 4th respondent. The learned Attorney General
also assisted the Court.

Issues
•
• Whether a Bar Council or Bar Association is entitled to pass resolution
demanding a Judge to resign, what is its effect on the independence of the
judiciary and whether it is constitutionally permissible

Judgement
•
• "It would thus be seen that yawning gap between proved misbehaviour and
bad conduct inconsistent with the high office on the part of a non-cooperating
Judge/Chief Justice of a High Court could be disciplined by self-regulation through
in-house procedure. This in-house procedure would fill in the constitutional gap
and would yield salutary effect. Unfortunately, recourse to this procedure was not
taken in the case at hand, may be, because of absence of legal sanction to such a
procedure
• Since the 1st respondent has already demitted the office, we have
stated as above so that it would form a precedent for future.
• The writ petition is accordingly disposed of."

RD Saxena
 • The appellant was practicing as an advocate in Bhopal . According to
him he was appointed as the legal advisor of the Madhya Pradesh co-operative bank .
He appeared for the bank for a few cases during this time . Later he was removed
from the position for some reasons after three years of service. 
• The bank asked back the case files which were with him for further
proceedings , but the appellant returned a bill of rupees 97100 as his legal
charges due and insisted to keep the case files till his payments are completed and
contented that he have a lien over such documents. 
• The dispute remained unresolved and the bank was reluctant to move
forward. 
• The bank manager filed a complaint in the Madhya Pradesh Bar council
for professional misconduct. Even after one year there was no completion of the
case and the case was transferred to the Bar Council Of India under section 36-B of
Advocates Act. 
• After holding inquiry, the Disciplinary committee of the Bar Council Of
India reached to conclusion that appellant was guilty of professional misconduct
and punished him for a fine of 1000 rupees and debarred him from appearing in court
for 18 months.

Issues:
• Whether an advocate has a lien on good under The Indian Contract Act
• Whether this lien amounts in case of case files
• Does rule 28, 29 of The Advocates Act covers to amounts not in the hand
of an Advocate

Judgement

The supreme court was also of the view that the appellant was guilty of misconduct
for not returning the case files back to the client.

At the same time regarding to extent of punishment court looked upon two aspects

There was no supreme court precedents on the same matter in issue

The appellant would have bona Fide believed , in respect of some high court
decisions , that he did have a lien.

In such circumstances it is not necessary to inflict harsh punishments , a

reprimand would be sufficient in respect of this case.

FACTS:-
• Complaint filed by the appellant against the advocate Mr. Hanuman Das Khatry
(respondent) before the Bar Council of Rajasthan.
• Allegation- The advocate wrote a letter to his client that the Judge who had to
decide his case accepts bribe and to give Rs. 10,000/- for a favourable decision.
• Contentions of respondent-advocate- No bribe was actually given to the Judge, the
Judge was himself terminated on charges of taking illegal gratification. Hence
there was no serious misconduct by the advocate.
• Appeal made to the BCI under Sec 37 of the Advocates Act 1961. BCI directed his
name to be struck off and he be permanently debarred from practicing.
• Advocate filed a review under Sec 44 of Advocates Act and the BCI accepts the
review application. (Sec 44 states that the disciplinary committee of the BCI may
review its order within 60 days from the date of passing the order).
• Appeal made to Supreme Court under Sec 38 of Advocates Act.
 
ISSUE: Whether the disciplinary committee, in exercise of its review powers, could
alter the initial order of suspension?
DECISION:  1. The duties of an Advocate are prescribed under Part VI of the BCI
Rules and one of the foremost duty is to conduct the functions and plead or act in
a dignifies manner, to respect & maintain dignity of the court and uphold client’s
interests.
2. The legal profession is based on honesty and integrity of an Advocate and the
Advocates Act 1961 has cast a responsibility on the authorities to take action
wherever it seems that the credibility & reputation of the profession is eroded by
certain persons or members of the Bar Associations.
3. The advocate had spent more than 50 years in legal profession and he is expected
to have high moral standards instead of dishonouring the profession. The Supreme
Court held that the earlier decision of the BCI was based on cogent evidences and
relevant considerations.
4. Also, in review petition the BCI cannot take a different view upon the same
facts as done by it in this case. Hence, original order of the BCI was restored by
the Apex Court and he was permanently restrained from practicing.
 
Ex

The petitioner, in the present case, was an ex-army officer. In 1972, the
petitioner was posted in Bangladesh, where some accusation which was related to
embezzlement was put on him and he was brought to the military court in India.
Charges against him were outlined and he was court-martialed from his post and
titles alongside imprisonment for 2 years. He filed a pre-affirmation application
in a civil Court to audit the matter and he got a reply from the court after an
extensive stretch of 11 years when the limitation period of the survey has been
expired. It was subsequently discovered that documents along with the application
got misplaced during a vicious strike by advocates. A special petition was filed by
the petitioner to announce strikes by advocates illicit. ISSUES The issue analyzed
by the court - Whether lawyers have a right to strike?

The Supreme Court of India concluded that the strike by an advocate is considered
unlawful and illicit. A strike might be allowed in the most extraordinary of the
uncommon situations where respectability, regard, and working of the courts are at
the stake. A silent disappointment can be showed or a meeting to the press and
media can be given, till the time it does not affect the working of the courts.