JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

CLINICAL III ASSIGNMENT

(PROFESSIONAL ETHICS, LAWYERING AND BAR-BENCH RELATIONS)

SALIENT FEATURES OF THE

CONTEMPT LAW
SUBMITTED TO

Mr. ZISHAN KHAN

FACULTY OF LAW

JAMIA MILLIAI SLAMIA

SUBMITTED BY

NIKHAT ZABI

B.A.LL.B.(H)

ROLL NO 43

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This assignment would not have been possible without the invaluable help and guidance of

several individuals who, in one way or another, played a key role in its preparation and

completion. This study on SALIENT FEATURES OF THE CONTEMPT LAW has not been

achieved as an individual pursuit but has been made possible as a result of the support of many

people. At the very outset, I take this opportunity and privilege to express my sincere sense of

gratitude and indebtedness to Professor Kahkashan Y. Danyal S. Dean, Faculty of Law, Jamia

Millia Islamia for her constant support and encouragement.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor and guide, Mr. Zishan Khan

Professor of sincere Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia for his guidance constructive

suggestions, and regular inputs without which it would not have been possible to complete this

thesis on time. His guidance has been invaluable in the process of research and writing and I

could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my dissertation. I am also

thankful to the library staff of the Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi for assisting

in my research work and patiently responding to my queries related to the books issue.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENT

S.NO PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 2

2. TABLE OF CONTENT 3-5

3. CHAPTER I 6-15

INTRODUCTION

1.2 ORIGIN OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM OF CONTEMPT 6-8

LAW 8-9

1.3 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY 9

1.4 LITERATURE REVIEW 10

1.5 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 11

1.6 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY 12

1.7 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 13

1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 13

1.9 CHAPTERISATION 13-15

4. CHAPTER II 16-19

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 INTRODUCTION 16

2.2 EVOLUTION OF CONTEMT LAW DURING BRITISH 16-17

PERIOD

2.2.1. COURT OF RECORD 17-18

2.2.2CONCEPT OF CONTEMPT OF COURT (BRITISH 18-19

PERIOD)

3
5. CHAPTER III 20-30

STATUTORY PROVISION

3.1 INTRODUCTION 20

3.2 STATUTORY PROVISIONS 20-21

3.2.1. THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1926. 21-23

3.2.2.THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1952 23-24

3.2.3. THE CONTEMPT OF COURT AT PRESENT 24

3.2.4. THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 25-27

3.2.5 OTHER STATUTORY PROVISIONS 27-29

3.2.6. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO 29-30

CONTEMPT

4. CHAPTER IV 31-35

CONTEMPT OF COURT_HIGH COURT

4.1 INTRODUCTION 31-32

4.2 HIGH COURT TO BE A COURT OF RECORD 32

4.3 NATURE OF CONTEMPT JURISDICTION OF HIGH 33-35

COURT

5. CHAPTER V 36-40

CONTEMPT OF COURT_SUPREME COURT

5.1 INTRODUCTION 36

5.2 SUPREME COURT AS A COURT OF RECORD 36-37

5.3 NATURE OF POWERS OF SUPREME COURT FOR 37-39

CONTEMPT OF COURT

5.4 SUO MOTO EXERCISE OF CONTEMPT POWERS 39-40

4
6. CHAPTER VI 41-52

ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPT LAW

6.1 INTRODUCTION 41

6.2 ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPT LAW IN INDIA 42

6.2.1 RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION 42-45

UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

VS. CONTEMPT OF COURT

6.2.1.1. ANALYSIS OF THE CASE LAWS 45

• PRASHANT BHUSHAN’S CASE 45-47

• IN RE: ARUNDHATI ROY 47

• IN RE: S. MUDULGAOKAR v. UNKNOWN 48-49

• IN RE: HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI C.S. KARNAN 49-50

51
• HARI SINGH NAGRA v. KAPIL SIBAL
52
• ABHYUDAYA MISHRA v. KUNAL KAMRA

7. CHAPTER VII 53-54

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY 55-59

5
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The powers of Court of Record to punish for contempt brevi manu and of inferior Courts to

punish for contempt in facie curiae are parts of the same thing1. The power in either case is

necessary, so that the justice may not be obstructed and the majesty of Law may not be

jeopardized by the disrespect and contumacy of the people. This subject naturally has many

faces and a vast body of its learning surrounds the exercise of the power by the Courts. The

power of Contempt of Court in India is governed by Constitutional Provisions besides the

statutory law.2 This research examines the source, nature and scope of the contempt of court in

India. It is the general notion that the power of contempt of court in India is inherited from the

British Courts particularly the Superior Courts i.e., King’s Bench and High Court of Chancery.

This notion has been considered in the light of the jurisdictional development of the courts as

well as the statutory laws. Efforts have been made to trace out its origin till its present status.

The research also focuses on the invocation of the powers of contempt of court and also the

willingness of the courts to exercise the said powers. It is also a part of discussion as to what

are the factors responsible for the contempt of court and also the practical aspect for which

these powers are being exercised by the courts for smooth functioning of the judicial system.

It is said that there can be a Kingdom without an army; but, public confidence in the authority

of the State cannot sustain if there are no courts of justice. The indigenous legal system of India

was based upon the concept that the law is above the sovereign and its courts. During those

days, the means of communication were slow and publication on anything was negligible or

1
Justice M. Hidayatullah, in Foreword to the book Contempt of Court, 5th Edition, authored by Sh. V.G.
Ramchandran, Eastern Book Company
2
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

6
nearly impossible. The courts neither possessed nor needed anything like the elaborate system

of Contempt Law such as we have, now. In the ancient times in India, the King himself

administered the justice to its subjects. The King was regarded as a fountain head of justice and

his words became the law. In those days, the flouting of the authority of the King or the

disrespect shown to its dignity was viewed very seriously. It was considered as one of the most

serious offences and was never tolerated; and, such acts were visited with barbarous and

sometimes inhumane punishments. With the growth of the society, it became impossible for

the King to administer the justice personally. It led to the appointment of the judges by the

King, to administer justice. English authors trace the history of the evolution of the law of

Contempt of Courts to the King and sovereignty as the judges derived authority to administer

justice from King. They hold the court to administer justice in the name of the King. Thus

disgrace or disregard of the rule of law or any act against the dignity of a court or a judge

amounted to Contempt of Court and was considered as an insult to the King himself. 3 When

Mughals entered India, they established their own courts by replacing the ancient judicial

system that was already existing. The justice was administered according to the principles of

Muslim Law. The Emperor used to hold the court and administer justice. The Emperor was

regarded as the supreme judge. His decision was final. Any disobedience or disrespect to the

decision of the Emperor was deemed to be an offence against the Emperor himself and the

same had to meet with the high degree of punishment. There were no certain rules of procedure

applicable in case of contempt. The same was dependent on the thinking of the particular

Emperor. This concept of ancient monarchy in the majesty of Law has persisted even in the

later days of democratic Governments. In the free world of today, wherever responsible

Governments exist, this concept of special respect to the seat of justice is attended with

punishment in case contumacious behaviour prevails.

3
Justice J D Kapoor, Law of Contempt of Court, Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., at page 1

7
Lord Morris summarized the purpose of contempt jurisdiction in the following words:

“In an ordered community Courts are established for the pacific settlement of disputes and for

the maintenance of law and order. In the general interests of the community, it is imperative

that the authority of the courts should not be imperilled and that recourse to them should not

be subject to unjustifiable interference. When such unjustifiable interference is suppressed,

justice are concerned for their own dignity. It is because the very structure or ordered life is at

risk if the recognized courts of the land are so flouted that their authority wanes and is

supplanted”4

1.2 ORIGIN OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM OF CONTEMPT LAW

The English law of contempt which itself had a haphazard growth came to be introduced in our

country in yet more haphazard manner. Power to punish for contempt being an attribute of a

Court of Record, the setting up of such courts by the British in India necessarily meant to

introduce the English law of contempt to a great extent. This is how English law of contempt

came to be introduced in India, initially. The Law as to contempt of court in India stands fairly

crystallised by the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 (here-in-after called “The Act”). It is to be

hoped that respect for courts of law, their decisions and orders will get due emphasis at the

hands of the Bar and the litigant public. The violation of courts order or direction is punishable

under section 12 of the Act. As per Section 11 of the Act, the High Courts can punish the

contemnors whether they are within or even outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. In

terms of section 10 of the Act, the High Court is empowered to punish for Contempt of

Subordinate Courts as well. Judges too are required to behave in a proper manner otherwise

they may also be proceeded against for contempt of their own court under section 16 of the

4
Attorney General Vs. Times Newspapers Ltd. (1974) AC 273, 302

8
Act. The legislators and the executive are also obliged to perform their duties to uphold the

dignity and majesty of the courts of justice. The democracy can progress only when its streams

of justice are kept pure, unsullied and undefiled by contempts; and, respected by one and all

An act constitutes contempt if it is calculated to interfere or has the tendency of interfering with

the due course of justice. The object behind the discipline, enforced by the court, in the case of

contempt is not only to vindicate the dignity of the court or the individual Judge; but, more to

prevent undue interference with the administration of justice. This is more intended for the

protection of faith of the public who had the aspiration of the courts for upholding its authority,

fairness and impartiality; besides, glory and reputation of the courts. The confidence of the

public in the courts must not be tarnished, diminished or lowered down by the contumacious

behavior of any person. An erring Judge and erring contemnor, both are danger to the pristine

purity of the seat of Justice. If anyone by his conduct affects this sanctity and purity of the seat

of Justice; then he deserves condemnation.

1.3 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

There have been repeated incidents of Contempt of Courts. In this research, the exercise of

contempt laws by the courts in the present day litigation has been discussed. Presently, the High

Courts and the Supreme Court are dealing with the cases of contempt. The High Courts and the

Supreme Court are empowered to try and punish for their contempt even if the contemnor is

within or outside or their local limits. There are number of cases reported in various Law

Journals where the High Courts and the Supreme Court have tried and punished the contemnors

for committing Contempt of Court. There have been instances of the High Court and Supreme

Court dealing with the cases of the contempt of the courts subordinate thereto. The mode and

manner of exercise of the powers relating to contempt of Courts by the High Courts and the

9
Supreme Court, in the present scenario of litigation, has been discussed in detail. Efforts have

been made to analyse and understand it in its true prospect.

1.4 LITERATURE REVIEW

For the purposes of this research, various books on Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, have been

referred e.g. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Bare Act

with Short Comments, (Professional Book Publishers, Delhi, 2020), G.C.V. Subba Rao,

Commentary of Contempt of Courts Act 1971, (ALT Publication, Hyderabad, 2016), V.G.

Ramchandran, Contempt of Court, 5th Edition 1983, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, V.G.

Ramchandran, Contempt of Court, (Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 6th Edition, 2002,

reprint 2005), Revised by Justice (Retd.) V.K. Mehrotra, S.K. Mookherji, Iyer’s Commentary

on Law of Contempt of Courts Act 1971, 6th Edition 2020, Delhi Law House, Delhi, M.P. Jain,

Outlines of Indian Legal History, 5th Edition, reprint 1999 Wadhwa & Company Law

Publishers, Nagpur, M.P. Singh, Outlines of Indian Legal & Constitutional History, 8th Edition

reprint 2012, Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Delhi and The Constitution of India,

Bare Act with Short Notes, 2019, Universal LexisNexis, Delhi etc. The Statutory Provisions

relating to the contempt of court in the Constitution of India and The Contempt of Courts Act,

have been referred. The other statutory provisions contained in other law e.g. Indian Penal

Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure, have been referred. Many

magazines, periodicals, law journals, newspapers, articles, have also been reviewed. Apart

from this, various websites from the internet had also been searched.

From the study of various law books, magazines, journals containing judicial decisions,

academic opinions and debates, law reports, published and unpublished data and other legal

material, it has been observed that the subject needs to be further researched in view of the new

10
developments. There are various aspects which are not covered in the research carried out so

far. The present study highlights the various hidden aspects and gives a new approach to the

subject.

1.5 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

There can be no doubt that the prime object of contempt jurisdiction is to uphold the dignity

and majesty of the courts and their image in the minds of the public is not whittled down. A

Judge, hearing a case, must not be exposed to any kind of fear or apprehension litigants also

need to be protected against the possibility of their case being influenced by any extraneous

matter. Similarly, an accused shall not be exposed to any public opinion against him. This is

the true purpose of the protection granted to the courts for protecting the dignity and prestige

of the court and that of the individual Judge or the bench as well. There is an area of conflict

between the contempt of court and the right to freedom of expression and speech. The

protection to the court is designed to ensure freedom from unlawful interference with the due

process of law. The fundamental rights in the Constitution of India are held to be the basic

structure of the Constitution of India, which cannot be altered even by the Parliament by

amending the Constitution.5 Under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, the right to

freedom is guaranteed.6 This right to freedom of expression is, though subjected to certain

reasonable restrictions; but, it does not mean that any fair and bonafide comments or criticism

of any judgment of a court renders any citizen liable for committing contempt of court.

Because, the right to freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right guaranteed under

the Constitution, which is above the rights / liabilities given / imposed by any other enactment.

5
Kesavananda Bharti Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225
6
19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.-(1) All citizens shall have the right- (a) to
freedom of speech and expression;

11
There need to be checks and balances upon the mode and manner of exercise of powers by

courts under Contempt of Court Act as the provisions may not act as oppression towards the

fair or true critics against the courts or a particular judge. Therefore, it becomes essential to

understand the concept of Contempt of Courts in India, in detail and also the legal provisions

and their exercise by the courts in the present times where the instances of Contempt of Courts

are rising day by day. In this research, the answers of the following questions have been sought.

1.6 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY

The Contempt of Courts Act contains elaborated provisions regarding the contempt of court,

right from its definition to the powers of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court and High Courts; and,

also the procedure to be adopted for the trial of a case of contempt. Since every law is a evolving

subject and the same is true with regard to the law on contempt as well. Every day a new aspect

of the contempt of court is being highlighted and dealt with by the Supreme Court and the High

Courts. An act actually amounts to contempt of court or not, is still not certain. This uncertain

situation prompted the researcher to take up this unexplored area of study for scrutiny and

analysis. The present study has been undertaken, keeping in mind the following objectives:-

(i) To study the concept and scope of the Contempt of Court in India.

(ii) To analyse the laws available to deal with the incidents of Contempt of Court in

India.

(iii) To examine the power of the Subordinate Courts in contempt cases.

(iv) Causes/factors responsible for Contempt of Courts.

(v) Based on the above, the reforms and remedial measures for the protection of

independence and dignity of Courts in India.

12
1.7 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

From the above, the following questions arise:

1. What is the concept of Contempt of Courts in India?

2. Under what circumstances, the provisions of contempt are invoked by the courts in

India?

3. Under what circumstances, these provisions are not invoked by the courts?

4. How far the exercise of these statutory provisions is necessary to protect the dignity

and independence of the courts?

5. What are the defenses available in contempt cases?

6. What are the causes/factors responsible for contempt of court?

7. Whether the subordinate courts be given powers to deal with contempt?

1.8 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In the present research, combined use of doctrinal as well as primary research, has been

undertaken. There is an active use of doctrinal research methodology for the study of

concept, origin and development of the rules relating to Contempt of Court in India. For

this purpose, an in-depth study of various law books, magazines, journals containing

judicial decisions, academic opinions and debates, law reports and other legal material is

used. Apart from this, various websites from the internet had also been searched.

1.9 CHAPTERISATION

This research contains seven chapters.

• CHAPTER I, INTRODUCTION

13
 The first chapter gives an introduction of the study regarding contempt of court in

India.

• CHAPTERII, HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The second chapter traces out the historical background of the contempt of court in

India. The growth of the contempt of court act has been divided into three distinct

phases. In the first phase, the contempt of court prevalent in ancient India. In the

second phase, the situation of contempt of court in Mughal Regime and in the third

phase, the law relating to contempt of court during British period however owing

to limitation the third phase has been discussed. The statutory & constitutional

provisions relating to contempt of court has also been extracted and summarized.

• CHAPTER III, STATUTORY PROVISION

• CHAPTER IV, CONTEMPT OF HIGH COURT

The fourth chapter deals with the powers of the High Courts for contempt of court.

Under Article 215 of the Constitution of India, the High Court is recognized as

„Court of Record‟ and also the powers to punish for contempt of itself. Section 10

of the Act empowers the High Court to take cognizance of the contempt of the courts

subordinate to it. Section 11 of the Act recognises the extra territorial jurisdiction

of the High Court in cases of contempt. Section 12 of the Act empowers the High

Court to impose punishments for contempt of court. The constitutional and statutory

powers of the High Court have been discussed in detail.

• CHAPTER V, CONTEMPT OF SUPREME COURT

14
 In the fifth chapter, the powers of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the cases of

contempt have been discussed. The Supreme Court is a „Court of Record‟ and its

powers for contempt have been recognized under Article 129 of the Constitution of

India, as such including the powers for punishing for contempt. Section 14 of the

Act empowers the Supreme Court for punishing for contempt, if the same is

committed in the face of the Supreme Court. How these powers are exercised by

the Supreme Court, has been discussed in detail with the help of the various

judgments.

• CHAPTER VI CONTEMPT OF COURT-SUPREME COURT

The sixth chapter is an analysis of the contempt law in present scenario of litigation.

an in-depth analysis of the powers of the courts, their mode and manner, has been

analysed. In the present research, an active use of literature e.g., various enactments

on contempt of court, judgments, law reports, magazines, periodicals and books has

also been referred.

• CHAPTER VII CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

The seventh chapter is of conclusions where-in conclusions have been drawn and

concluding remarks have been made on the basis of the entire thesis. Based on the

overall study, certain recommendations and suggestions have also been made and

remedial measures are suggested.

15
 CHAPTER II

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 INTRODUCTION

The law relating to contempt of court existing today is principally of English origin. In

India, the Courts are established either by Constitution7 or by the Statutory Laws. Their

jurisdiction is defined either in the Constitution or in the Statutory Laws. The Superior

Courts i.e., the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts are established by the

Constitution and most of their powers are also described in the Constitution itself. Similar

is the case w.r.t. their powers regarding the imposition of punishment for their contempt.

The power for contempt has been with the court of record since ages. The reason behind

the same is that the Court shall not be powerless and their orders and directions needs to be

obeyed and all necessary powers needs to be vested with them so that they can ensure their

orders are complied with by all in letter and spirit. A learned jurist, Blaise Pascal, while

expressing his thoughts about the inter-dependency of power and justice in the legal world

has propounded in the following words: “Justice without power is inefficient. Power

without justice is tyranny. Justice without power is opposed because there are always

wicked men. Power without justice is soon questioned. Justice and power must, therefore,

be brought together so that whatever is just may be powerful and whatever is powerful may

be just”8

2.2 EVOLUTION OF CONTEMT LAW DURING BRITISH PERIOD

The Britishers made a remarkable change in the existing administration of justice in India.

The Britishers made the law systematic and the law got certainty. The judicial system was

7
The Constitution of India
8
Lawyers Update, July 2005, Volume XI Part 7, Universal Book Traders, Delhi at page 1

16
 stream lined and the process was made rational. The powers of the court for contempt were

defined and made statutory. Hence, in the powers of contempt of court are discussed in the

British period. When the East India Company entered India and assumed the responsibility

for administering Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, the Muslim criminal law was very well

entrenched in that territory. The British administrators did not immediately disturb the

status quo, and allowed this law to continue.9 The Muslim law was not in accordance with

the British law. The principles on which both the laws operate were poles apart. The

Britishers have an uphill task to replace the prevalent judicial system, as the courts

following Muslim law were exercising the powers of contempt, which has no legal basis;

rather the same was as per the wishes of those in power. The Britishers established good

hierarchy of courts and also introduced the concept of Court of Record, a court, which could

exercise all the powers of a court of record, including the powers to try and punish for

contempt of itself.10

2.2.1. COURT OF RECORD

In Corpus Juris11 a Court of Record has been defined as a court wherein the judicial

proceedings are enrolled in the parchment for a perpetual memorial and testimony and has

power to impose fine and imprisonment for contempt of its authority ; (i) a court which

maintains the record of its proceedings and that may fine or imprison ; (ii) a court whose

proceedings and rolls are called the Records of the Court and regarded as high and eminent

authority that they cannot be called in question ; (iii) a judicial organised tribunal having

attributes and exercising functions independent of the person of the Magistrate designated

9
M.P. Jain, Outlines of Indian Legal History, 5th Edition, reprint 1999, Wadhwa & Company Law Publishers, at
page 363
10
Law Commission of India, “274th Report on review of contempt of court act 1971” (April, 2018).
11
Corpus Juris Volume XV, page 720-721.

17
 generally to hold it and proceeding according to the course of the common law, and a court

having a seal. Courts may be designated by statute as Courts of Record. In England the

King’s Bench, Courts of Assize, Oyer and Terminer, Court of Exchequer, the Privy Council,

the Court of Chancery, etc. were Superior Courts of Record.

2.2.2CONCEPT OF CONTEMPT OF COURT (BRITISH PERIOD)

Initially, during the British period, there was no proper judicial system either in the Presidency

Towns or in the other establishments. Though the Britishers through many Charters established

many courts; but, the difficulty was the said courts were manned by non-lawyers mainly the

traders and merchants. The early courts were under too much executive control.12 The laws

which the courts applied in the administration of justice were the principles of equity, justice

and good conscience besides the rules made by the company from time to time.13 There was

no codified law which the courts had to apply and therefore they gave a summary and ready

justice in all cases which came before them. No rules of procedure or evidence were prescribed

which the courts had to observe.14No specific provision was made as to how the courts had to

work and what canons of law and justice they had to follow.15 The judges, as per their own

wisdom, used to impose punishments for any disobedience of their orders.

The British period thus opens with extremely alimentary and executive judicial system in the

Presidency Town. The major breakthrough occurred nearly 125 years of the British

administration when the first Court of Record was established in 172616 The company under

12
M.P. Jain, Outlines of Indian Legal History, 5th Edition, reprint 1999, Wadhwa & Company Law Publishers,
at page 2
13
M.P. Singh, Outlines of Indian Legal & Constitutional History, 8th Edition, reprint 2012, Universal Law
Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., at page 11
14
Ibid
15
Supra note 13 at p.14
16
Mayor’s Court established in Calcutta as Court of Record

18
the previous Charters was finding itself unable to cope up with the problems which arose due

to its extended and enlarged establishments. Therefore, it requested the King to issue a Charter

by which special power could be granted to the Company. Accepting the request of the

company, the King George I, on 24.09.1726, granted the Charter of 1726 which provided for

establishment of certain courts including Mayor’s Court.

19
 CHAPTER III

STATUTORY PROVISIONS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Since there was no statute governing the contempt of court and as submitted earlier the High

Courts were using the power to punish for contempt on the basis of assumption that the same

is inherent in them. The need was felt for the statute governing the contempt of court. In some

of the old provinces of India, there were no High Courts and only Chief Courts or Courts of

Judicial Commissioners were functioning as the highest courts in those provinces. For a long

time, it was not clear whether Chief Courts and Courts of Judicial Commissioners had the same

powers in relation to contempt as the High Courts had. It was also equally unsettled whether

the jurisdiction of the High Courts in contempt cases extended also to contempt of courts

subordinate to them. The subordinate courts, not being Courts of Record, obviously did not

possess any inherent power to punish for contempt. At the same time, there was no general

provision for the punishment of contempt of these courts. The Indian Penal Code which was

passed in 1861 made only certain acts which would be punishable as contempt in the name of

specific offences. In this scenario, there was a pressing need for legislation on the field.

3.2 STATUTORY PROVISIONS

In 1908-09, Lord Minto‘s Government consulted all the Provincial Governments as to whether

legislation should be undertaken:

(i) to enable High Courts other than Chartered High Courts to protect themselves in

respect of contempts of courts, and

20
 (ii) to empower all High Courts to give a reasonable measure of protection to courts

subordinate to them in respect of contempts and improper comments on pending

cases Overwhelming opinions came in favour of the legislation.

But by the time these opinions came to be considered in 1911, the Press Act of 1910 was already

enacted and the Government felt that it was neither necessary nor opportune to proceed with

the contemplated contempt legislation. However, to deal effectively with the situation, if it

became acute for penalising contempt of authority of courts of justice or of persons empowered

by law to record evidence and for the publication of false or inaccurate reports of pending

judicial proceedings or making comments regarding persons concerned in them, calculated to

cause prejudice in the public mind in regard to such proceedings; hence, a Bill was prepared in

1911. This Bill, as revised in the light of the comments received, adopted the simple device of

making certain amendments in the Indian Penal Code and certain consequential amendments

in the Code of Criminal Procedure. It sought to introduce a new section 228 of the Indian Penal

Code. The Bill was introduced in the Legislative Council on March 18th, 1914. But the

consideration of the Bill was postponed on account of the outbreak of the First World War. It

was taken up again after the war in 1921.17

3.2.1. THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1926.

After further consideration, Government finally abandoned the 1914 Bill and decided in favour

of introducing legislation on the lines of Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru‘s suggestions. The same, in

short, was the genesis of the Bill, which after important modification came to be enacted as the

Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 (India Act XII of 1926) on May 1st, 192618. The Bill as originally

17
V.G. Ramachandran, Contempt of Court, 5th Edition, Eastern Book Company, at page 21
18
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926

21
drafted purported to define contempt of court ‘and while vesting power in the High Court

(including Chief Courts and the Courts of Judicial Commissioners) to punish for contempt of

itself, sought to confer a like power on the High Court in respect of contempt of the courts

subordinate to it. This Act also sought to define the extent of the punishment which may be

awarded in contempt cases. The Bill also included provisions for taking cognizance of offences

by way of contempt and the procedure to be followed in respect of such offences.

The section 2 of the said Act specifically gave power to the High Court to punish in respect of

the contempt of court subordinate to it. Similarly, the section 3 prescribed the limit of the

punishment that may be awarded in case of contempt of court upto six months imprisonment

or fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or both. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926

Act may be regarded as a step in the right direction. The salient feature of the Act was that it

prescribed specific limits as to the punishment which may be imposed in contempt cases. The

intention was to make these limits applicable irrespective of whether the contempt was that of

the High Court itself or of a court subordinate to it. While interpreting this provision, Jenkins,

C.J., in Legal Remembrance Vs. Motilal Ghose & Ors.,19observed that “the power to punish

for contempt well merited the description that it is arbitrary, unlimited and uncontrolled

because there is no limit to the imprisonment that may be inflicted or the fine that may be

imposed save the court’s unfettered discretion”. Almost an identical view was expressed by the

Lahore High Court in Harkishen Lal Vs. The Crown.20 In view of the interpretation placed upon

the Act that the power of punishment provided in Section 3 related only to contempt of

subordinate courts, this Act was amended in 1937 to clarify that the limits applied in all cases21

and the following proviso was added to section 3 of The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926:-

19
(1941) ILR 41 Cal 173, 222
20
ILR 18 Lah 69

22
“Provided further that notwithstanding anything elsewhere contained in any law the High-

Court shall not impose a sentence in excess of that specified in this section for any contempt

either in respect of itself or of a Court subordinate to it.”

In this way, it was settled that the limit of punishment, that could be imposed by the High Court

in the case of contempt, was same and it does not make any difference that the contempt

committed is of the High Court itself or any court subordinate to it, as the same protection was

needed by the subordinate courts as that by the High Court.

3.2.2.THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1952

The existing Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 was repealed and replaced by The Contempt of

Courts Act, 1952. The earlier Act of 1926 had not defined the term ‘’Contempt of Court”. It

was also silent on the aspect of the extra territorial jurisdiction of High Court for the contempt

cases, if the contempt is committed outside the local limits of the High Court or the contemnor

is found outside the limits of the High Court. The Bombay High Court in the case of In Re:

Benjamin Guy Horniman Vs. Unknown22 also held that the High Court had no power to arrest

for contempt of itself, if a person is outside its jurisdiction.

Though, the Act of 1952 largely re-enacted the provisions contained in the 1926 Act; but, cured

the aforesaid aspects. It made two remarkable changes.

(i) By defining the expression High Court ‘to include Courts of Judicial

Commissioners, the Act made it clear that those courts had powers to punish for

contempts of subordinate courts also.

22
(1944) 46 BOM LR 94 : ILR 1944 Bom 333

23
 (ii) The Act made it clear that the High Court (including the Court of a Judicial

Commissioner) will be having jurisdiction to inquire into and try a person for

contempt of itself or that of any court subordinate to it. This was irrespective of the

fact that whether the contempt is alleged to have been committed within or outside

the local limits of its jurisdiction and further as to whether the person alleged to

have committed the contempt is found within or outside such limits.

3.2.3. THE CONTEMPT OF COURT AT PRESENT

With the passage of time and on the basis of the experience/difficulties faced in relation to

contempt of court, it was observed that the existing law relating to contempt of Courts is not

fully certain, defined and satisfactory. The jurisdiction to punish for contempt, deals with two

important fundamental rights of the citizen, firstly, the right to personal liberty and secondly,

the right to freedom of expression. In this situation, it was considered advisable to have the

entire law to be scrutinised by a special committee. In furtherance thereof, a Committee was

set up by the Government in 1961 under the Chairmanship of late Shri H. N. Sanyal, the then

Additional Solicitor General.23 The Committee undertook a comprehensive examination of the

law and the difficulties faced in relation to contempt of Court, in the light of the prevalent

position in India and various other foreign countries. The recommendations made by the

Committee, took note of the importance of the right to freedom of speech, given in the

Constitution and at the same time, the need for protecting the dignity of the Courts and the

authority of administration of justice.24 Most of the recommendations of the Committee were

accepted by the Government. The Parliament, after considering the views expressed by the

State Governments, Union Territory Administrations, on those recommendations, besides the

23
Statement of Objects and Reasons, The Contempt of Courts Act 1971
24
Ibid

24
decisions of the Supreme Court, the High Courts and the Judicial Commissioners, enacted The

Contempt of Court Act, 1971.

3.2.4. THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971

On 24th December, 1971, The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (Act No. 70 of 1971) came into

force25 by repealing the existing Contempt of Courts Act, 1952. This Act comprehensively

deals with the contempt of courts not only by defining the contempts; rather, by prescribing the

powers of the Hon‘ble Supreme Court of India for contempt and also that of the High Courts.

It also empowers the High Courts to punish for contempt of itself as well as that of the courts

subordinate to it. This Act again recognizes the extra territorial jurisdiction of the Hon‘ble

Supreme Court and the High Courts in the case of contempt. These Hon‘ble Courts can take

cognizance of the offence of contempt committed within or outside their jurisdiction and can

punish the contemnor irrespective of the fact that he is found within or outside their local

jurisdiction.

This Act has been amended on three occasions. Firstly, by The Contempt of Courts

(Amendment) Act, 1976 (Act No. 45 of 1976),26 to amend section 15 of the Act whereby to

enable the Delhi High Court, to take action on criminal contempts, on a motion made by such

law officer as may be notified by the Central Government or by any other person with consent

of that law officer.27 This was in view of the fact that the Delhi being a Union Territory and

25
The notes on clauses explain in detail the provisions of the Bill-Gazette of India, 29.02.1968, Pt. II, S. 2, Ext.,
at page 104
26
Gazette of India, 19.01.1976, Pt. II, S. 2, Ext., at page 402
27
Act No. 45 of 1976-Sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971) provides
that in the case of a criminal contempt (other than a contempt referred to in section 14) the Supreme Court or the
High Court may take action on its own motion or on a motion made by (as) the Advocate-General, or (b) any
other person with the consent in writing of the Advocate-General. In the light of the explanation to Section 15,
the expression AdvocateGeneral means- (a) in relation to the Supreme Court, the Attorney-General or the
Solicitor-General. (b) in relation to the High Court, the Advocate-General of the State or any of the States for
which the High Court has been established, and (c) in relation to the Court of a Judicial Commissioner, such
Law Officer as the Central Government may by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf. 2.
Union territory of Delhi is unique in that it has its own High Court. There is, however, no Advocate-General in
relation to that High Court. In the case of any criminal contempt of a subordinate Court in a Union territory sub-
section (2) of Section 15 enables any Law Officer specified by the Central Government to make a motion to the

25
there is no Advocate-General. Secondly, by The Contempt of Courts (Amendment) Act, 2006

(Act No. 6 of 2006), which amended section 13 of the Act whereby the justification by truth

was permitted as a valid defence in case of contempt. Thirdly, by the Jammu & Kashmir

Reorganisation Act, 2019 (34 of 2019),28 whereby the proviso to Section 1(2) has been omitted,

which had made the act inapplicable to the State of Jammu & Kashmir.

The section 2 of the Act defines two types of contempt of court as follows-

a) "contempt of court" means civil contempt or criminal contempt;

b) "civil contempt" means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order,

writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court;

c) "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. scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any

court; or

ii. prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial

proceeding; or

iii. interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration

of justice in any other manner.

Section 10 defines the power of High Courts to punish for contempt of its subordinate courts,

thereby authorising the High Courts to take cognizance of the contempts committed against the

High Court for taking necessary action. But there is no such corresponding provision in the case of any criminal
contempt of the High Court in a Union territory. The High Court has, therefore, to keep a watch and take action
on its own motion in all such cases. 3. To avoid practical difficulties it is necessary to amend sub-section (1) of
Section 15 of the Act so as to enable the High Court of Delhi to take action on criminal contempts as referred to
in that sub-section on a motion made by such Law Officer as may be notified by the Central Government or by
any other person with the consent of that Law Officer.
28
Dated 9-8-2019, w.e.f. 31-10-2019 vide SO 2889(E), Dated 9-8-2019, The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971,
Commercial Law Publishers India Pvt. Ltd., 2020

26
subordinate courts. Section 11 deals with the extra territorial jurisdiction of the Contempt of

Court Act thereby the High Court is authorised to take cognizance/action of the contempt of

itself or of subordinate court irrespective of the fact whether the contempt is committed within

or outside its local limits and the contemnor is found within or outside its local limits. Section

12 prescribes extent for punishment for contempt to simple imprisonment upto six months or

fine upto two thousand rupees or both. Section 14 prescribes a procedure where the contempt

is committed in the face of Supreme Court or a High Court, whereas, Section 16 prescribes for

contempt by Judge or Magistrate or any other person acting judicially. Section 17 and 18

prescribes for procedures and section 19 prescribes for provisions of appeal. Section 20

prescribes the limitation for action for contempt as one year from the date on which the

contempt is allegedly committed and Section 23 prescribes the powers of the Supreme Court

and the High Courts to make rules.

3.2.5 OTHER STATUTORY PROVISIONS

There are many provisions in other laws which deal not strictly with the Contempt of Courts;

but, are related to the disobedience of certain orders. Chapter-X of The Indian Penal Code

contains the provisions of contempt of lawful authority of public servants. Particularly, sections

175, 178, 179, 180 and 228 of the Code make these offences punishable with imprisonment or

fine or both. Sections 175, 178, 179, 180 and 228 are reproduced herein below:

―175. Omission to produce document or electronic record to public servant by person legally

bound to produce it.— Whoever, being legally bound to produce or deliver up any document

or electronic record of any public servant, as such, intentionally omits so to produce or deliver

up the same, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one

month, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both, or, if the document

27
or electronic record is to be produced or delivered up to a Court of Justice, with simple

imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to

one thousand rupees, or with both.

178. Refusing oath or affirmation when duly required by public servant to make it.—Whoever

refuses to bind himself by an oath or affirmation to state the truth, when required so to bind

himself by a public servant legally competent to require that he shall so bind himself, shall be

punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine

which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

179. Refusing to answer public servant authorised to question.—Whoever, being legally bound

to state the truth on any subject to any public servant, refuses to answer any question demanded

of him touching that subject by such public servant in the exercise of the legal powers of such

public servant, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six

months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

180. Refusing to sign statement.—Whoever refuses to sign any statement made by him, when

required to sign that statement by a public servant legally competent to require that he shall

sign that statement, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend

to three months, or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees, or with both.

228. Intentional insult or interruption to public servant sitting in judicial proceeding.—

Whoever intentionally offers any insult, or causes any interruption to any public servant, while

such public servant is sitting in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished with simple

imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to

one thousand rupees, or with both.”

Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 prescribes the conditions/procedure for

prosecution of the offences of contempt of lawful authority of public servants, for offences

28
against the public justice and those relating to documents given in evidence. Section 195 has

to be read conjointly with section 345. Section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,

deals with the procedure in aforesaid sections of contempt.

Likewise, the Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 also prescribes the

punishment for the disobedience of injunction order passed by a court.

3.2.6. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO CONTEMPT

Before considering the aforesaid statutory provisions relating to contempt of court, it is

necessary to bear in mind clearly the implications of the provisions of our Constitution relating

to contempt of courts. The following are the provisions of the Constitution having a bearing on

contempt of courts:

a. Articles 19 (1) (a) and 19 (2)

b. Article 129

c. Article 142 (2)

d. Article 215

The same are extracted herein below:

“19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.-(1) All citizens shall have

the right- (a) to freedom of speech and expression; --- (2) Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause

(1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in

so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the

said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the

State, friendly relations with Foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to

contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.

29
129. Supreme Court to be a court of record.- The Supreme Court shall be a court of record and

shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.

142. Enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court and unless as to discovery, etc.- (1)

... (2) Subject to the provisions of any law made in this behalf by Parliament, the Supreme

Court shall, as respects the whole of the territory of India, have all and every power to make

any order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person, the discovery or production

of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.

215. High Courts to be courts of record.- Every High Court shall be a court of record and shall

have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.”

Article 19 (1) (a) guarantees to all citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression and

Article 19 (2) provides inter alia that this right is subject to any law imposing reasonable

restrictions in relation to contempt of court. Articles 129, 142 (2) besides entry 77 of List I of

the Seventh Schedule, relates to contempt of the Supreme Court, whereas Article 215 relates

to contempt of High Courts and Entry 14 of List III of the Seventh Schedule covers contempt

of courts other than the Supreme Court. The reason behind creating the contempt jurisdiction

and empowering the courts with the same is with a view to protect the courts and the judicial

process from being maligned or obstructed in any way. The Superior Courts are armed with

such powers so that they can protect not only themselves from any contempt; rather, the

Subordinate Courts are also protected by them. How these powers are being exercised by the

courts will be seen in the succeeding chapters.

30
 CHAPTER IV

CONTEMPT OF HIGH COURT

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The High Court is the highest court of a State. It exercises the entire jurisdiction over the

territory of that State. The establishment of the High Court started way back in the year 1861

under the Indian High Courts Act, 1861. This year also constitutes a land mark in the process

of development of legal and judicial institutions in India. In this year, the steps were taken to

establish the High Courts at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay. These High Courts were not only

much better instruments of justice than the preceding courts; but, also represented the

unification of the then existing two distinct and disparate judicial systems i.e. the Company‘s

Court in the provinces of Bengal, Madras and Bombay; and, the three Supreme Courts in the

three Presidency Towns.29

The summary jurisdiction to punish for contempt was being exercised by all the three Chartered

High Courts of Calcutta, Bombay and Madras at least since 186730After enactment of the

Government of India Act, 1915, the same jurisdiction of the then existing High Court were

continued by virtue of Section 106. Section 113 of the Government of India Act, 1915 31made

a provision for establishment of new High Courts by Letters Patent and the conferment of the

same jurisdiction as are vested or may be conferred on the High Courts which existed at the

commencement of the Act. Similarly, The Government of India Act, 1935, further continued

this power, authority and summary jurisdiction to the various High Courts existing at that time.

29
Supra
30
Advocate General, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. Ramana Rao AIR 1967 AP 299 : 1967 Cri.L.J. 1470
31
Adoksh Kumar, Government of India Act 1915 available at: www.legalservicesindia.com (last accessed on
10.11.2023)

31
Every High Court was declared to be a Court of Record by virtue of Section 220(1) 32 of the

Government of India Act, 1935 whereas the summary jurisdiction and powers existing at the

time of commencement of the Act33 were continued through Section 223. 34

The process of

establishing the High Courts, initiated in 1861, continued to gain momentum. With the passage

of time, many other High Courts were established at Patna, Lahore and Allahabad. At present,

the High Courts occupy the respectable and significant place in the judicial hierarchy in India.

These Courts enjoy a vast and varied jurisdiction.

4.2 HIGH COURT TO BE A COURT OF RECORD

Article 215 of the Constitution declares every High Court to be a Court of Record; as such, it

has all the powers including the powers to punish for contempt. The wording of Article 215 is

as follows:

―215. High Courts to be courts of record.- Every High Court shall be a court of record and

shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.”35

The concept of Court of Record as existed in the Superior Courts in England was introduced

in India. After the commencement of the Constitution, the same powers of the High Court are

recognised and continued, which the High Courts were exercising deeming it as inherent in

them.

4.3 NATURE OF CONTEMPT JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT

32
Prof. C.L. Anand, “Constitutional Law and History of Government of India” “Government of India Act, 1935
and The Constitution of India”, 1992, Seventh Edition, The University Book Agency, at page 647
33
Government of India Act, 1935
34
Ibid
35
The Constitution of India, Bare Act With Short Notes, 2019, Universal LexisNexis, at page 82

32
The High Court being a Constitutional Court, apart from being a Court of Record, has all the

powers to punish for contempt of itself. This special jurisdiction is inherent in every Court of

Record from the very nature of the court itself.36 The High Court can take cognizance of

contempt of itself and also courts/tribunals subordinate to it. In the words of justice Wilmot in

Rex Vs. Almon,37 which memorable “It is not their (Judges) own cause but the cause of the

public which they are vindicating at the instance of the public .... and so if the seat of justice

abuses that confidence and an impression is created in the public mind that the Judge is

excitable, indecorous and insultive to party, or counsel, then the confidence of the public is

shaken in the administration of justice .......... and whenever men‟s allegiance to the law is

fundamentally shaken, it is the most fatal and most dangerous obstruction of justice and in my

opinion calls out for a more rapid and immediate redress than any obstruction whatsoever, not

for the sake of the Judges as private individuals but because they are the channels by which the

King‟s justice is conveyed to the people.” case is the basic foundation of the English Law of

Contempt and the same stands approved in numerous English and Indian decisions :-

“It is not their (Judges) own cause but the cause of the public which they are vindicating at the

instance of the public .... and so if the seat of justice abuses that confidence and an impression

is created in the public mind that the Judge is excitable, indecorous and insultive to party, or

counsel, then the confidence of the public is shaken in the administration of justice .......... and

whenever men‟s allegiance to the law is fundamentally shaken, it is the most fatal and most

dangerous obstruction of justice and in my opinion calls out for a more rapid and immediate

redress than any obstruction whatsoever, not for the sake of the Judges as private individuals

but because they are the channels by which the King’s justice is conveyed to the people.”

36
Sukhdev Singh Sodhi Vs. Chief Justice S. Teja Singh & Judges of the Pepsu High Court AIR 1954 SC 186 :
(1954) SCR 454
37
(1765) Wilmot Notes 243

33
Sections 4(2) and 5 of Cr.P.C. expressly exclude the application of Cr.P.C. to any special

jurisdiction. Hence, the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be applied in trial of contempt by the

High Court. The High Court can deal with the cases of contempt summarily and adopt its own

procedure. It is however necessary that the procedure must be fair and the contemnor is also

made aware of the charge against him, besides giving him a fair and reasonable opportunity to

defend himself. This special right to punish for contempt and the existence of a special practice

and procedure is not subject to the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the case of High Court of

Judicature at Allahabad Through its Registrar Vs. Raj Kishore & Ors.,38 the Hon‘ble Supreme

Court has held that the jurisdiction in contempt is independent jurisdiction of original nature.

Hence any act of Legislature can neither take away this jurisdiction nor can confer it afresh by

virtue of its own authority. Similarly, the Supreme Court or the Legislature cannot deprive a

High Court of the right which is vested in it as aforesaid.

Article 215 of the Constitution empowers the High Court with all the powers of a Court of

Record, including the power to punish for contempt of itself. Hence, the phrase the power to

punish for contempt of itself‘ in no way limit such powers of the High Court which it possesses

as a Court of Record or other powers which may be invested upon it by law. 39 Such of the

powers have been recognised in the Constitution itself. Besides this, the High Court is also

specifically empowered under the Contempt of Court Act to impose punishments for its

contempt under Section 12 40

of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Section 1041of The

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 empowers the High Court to take cognizance of the contempts

of its subordinate courts, in same way as that of the contempt committed of the High Court

itself, whereas, Section 2742 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 authorises the High Court to try

38
AIR 1997 SC 1186
39
Lakhan Singh Vs. Ranbir Singh & Anr. AIR 1953 All 342
40
Section 12
41
Section 10
42
Section 11

34
the offences committed even outside its local limits or the offender is found beyond the

jurisdiction of the court.

The powers of the contempt can be invoked by the High Court

(1) On application of any party

(2) Upon motion by the Advocate-General

(3) Suo-Moto

The power of contempt can be exercised even suo-moto by the High Court. That means that

High Court can initiate contempt proceedings at its own even if no party has called upon the

court to do so. Justice K.S. Venkatraman rightly expressed the view, In Re: Yegnanarayaniah43

that no limitation has been imposed in Article 215 of the Constitution that in cases of civil

contempts the High Court cannot take action suo-moto. For it is easy to conceive of a case

where no party may care to come forward to move the court for initiating proceedings in

contempt; but, the court may consider it necessary and expedient to initiate action suo-moto. It

is obviously necessary in such cases that the court should exercise its inherent power. This is

also so on the ground that the proceedings in contempt are as of fact quasi criminal in nature.44

The Contempt of Court Act, 1971 does not and cannot take away this power of the High Court.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Amit Chanchal Jha Vs. Registrar High Court of

Delhi 45
opined that the power of contempt should not lightly be initiated by the court,

particularly against a lawyer; but, the exercise of such power may be exercised when it becomes

necessary in the public interest and also for due administration of justice.

43
(1974) 1 MLJ 155
44
Andre Paul Terence Ambard Vs. Attorney General of Trinidad AIR 1936 PC 141 : (1936) AC 332
45
(2015) 13 SCC 288 : (2015) 147 AIC 77 : (2015) 109 ALR 672

35
 CHAPTER V

CONTEMPT OF COURT– SUPREME COURT

5.1 INTRODUCTION

The Supreme Court is the creation of the Constitution, therefore, its composition, powers,

jurisdiction etc. all are given exhaustively in the constitution itself. The Supreme Court is

having original, appellate, extraordinary writ and advisory jurisdiction, under the constitution

of India. The Supreme Court of India exercises all its powers throughout the territory of India.

The decisions given or the law laid down by the Supreme Court is binding on all the Courts,

tribunals and other authorities in the country under Article 141216 of the Constitution of India.

All civil and judicial authorities are to act in aid of the Supreme Court.

5.2 SUPREME COURT AS A COURT OF RECORD

As per Article 129 of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court is a Court of Record and it

has all the powers including the power to punish for contempt. In India, the Chartered High

Courts from their inception were by Letters Patents designated as Courts of Record. The

Federal Court which was replaced by the Supreme Court was also declared a Court of Record.

When Article 129 was moved in Constituent Assembly for its acceptance, Dr. Ambedkar

stated,46 A Court of Record is a court, the records of which are admitted to be of evidentiary

value and they are not to be questioned when they are produced before any court. That is the

meaning of the word „Court of Record‟. Then the second part of Article 108 (now Article 129)

says that the court shall have the power to punish for contempt of itself. As a matter of fact,

once you make a Court of Record by statute, the power to punish for contempt necessarily

46
V.G. Ramchandran, Contempt of Court, 5th Edition 1983, Eastern Book Company, at page 50

36
follows from that position. But it was felt that in view of the fact in England this power is largely

derived from the common law and we have no such thing as common law in this country, we

feel it better to state the whole position in the statute itself”

5.3 NATURE OF POWERS OF SUPREME COURT FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT

The contempt jurisdiction of Court of Record is part of its inherent jurisdiction.47 In other words

the power to punish for contempt is the part of the inherent jurisdiction of the Court of Record.

Master Jacob has described the basis of this jurisdiction in the following words:

The authority of the judiciary to uphold, to protect and to fulfill the judicial function of

administering justice according to law in a regular, orderly and effective manner.‟ Such a

power is not derived from statute nor truly from the common law but instead flows from the

very concept of a Court of law”48

Prior to the enactment of The Contempt of Court‘s Act, 1926, in India, the jurisdiction of the

High Courts for contempt was regulated by the principles of common law. These High Courts

exercised the power of contempt, in absence of statutory provisions, on the premise of the same

being inherent in them as a Court of Record.49Being the superior Courts of Record, the King‘s

Bench in England and High Courts in India have the powers and jurisdiction to correct the

orders of its subordinate courts and enjoyed the inherent powers of contempt to protect the

subordinate courts. These inherent powers of a superior Court of Record have remained intact

even after codification of contempt law.50

47
Nigel Lowe and Brenda Sufrin, Treatise on the Law of Contempt, Third Edition, 1996, Butterworths at page
19
48
Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India & Anr. AIR 1998 SC 1895
49
Delhi Judicial Service Association, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. AIR 1991 SC 2176 :
(1991) 3 SCR 936 : 1991 AIR SCW 2419 : (1991) 4 SCC 406
50
Ibid

37
In Delhi Judicial Service Association, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.,51

while the Supreme Court was dealing with the inherent powers of the Supreme Court under

contempt jurisdiction, the following questions arose for consideration:

“(a) whether the Supreme Court has inherent jurisdiction or power to punish for contempt of

subordinate or inferior Courts under article 129 of the Constitution?

(b) Whether the inherent jurisdiction and power of the Supreme Court is restricted by the

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971?

(c) whether the incident interfered with the due administration of justice and constituted

contempt of Court? and

(d) what punishment should be awarded to the contemnors found guilty of contempt?

The Supreme Court, answering the above questions, observed (para 50 and 51 of AIR): “Article

142 (1) of the Constitution provides that Supreme court in exercise of its jurisdiction may pass

such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any “cause” or

“matter” pending before it. The expression “cause” or “matter” would include any proceeding

pending in Court and it would cover almost every kind of proceeding in Court including civil

or criminal. The inherent power of this Court under Article 142 coupled with the plenary and

residuary powers under Articles 32 and 136 embraces power to quash criminal proceedings

pending before any Court to do complete justice in the matter before this Court”.

The Courts of Record also have the inherent power to punish for contempt committed in their

face; but, the inherent power to punish for contempt committed outside the Court, resides

exclusively in the superior Courts of Record. Superior Courts of Record also have inherent

51
AIR 1991 SC 2176 : (1991) 3 SCR 936 : 1991 AIR SCW 2419 : (1991) 4 SCC 406

38
jurisdiction to punish for contempt committed in relation to the proceedings before inferior

Courts.52

By virtue of Entry 77 List I, the Parliament is competent to enact a law with respect to the

powers of the Supreme Court regarding contempt of itself. Such a law may prescribe the nature

of punishment that may be imposed on a contemnor under Article 129 read with Article 142(2)

of the Constitution of India. As the Parliament has not enacted any such law; hence, the

Supreme Court is free to impose any punishment for the contempt, whatever it deems proper.53

5.4 SUO MOTO EXERCISE OF CONTEMPT POWERS

The Supreme Court may take cognizance of any contempt suo moto or on the basis of the

motion made by any party. In the case of Mahipal Singh Rana, Advocate Vs. State of Uttar

Pradesh,54 the Supreme Court, while upholding the conviction of an advocate for contempt,

held that on failure of State Bar Council as well as Bar Council of India to take disciplinary

action, the Supreme Court can exercise suo moto powers for punishing contemnor.

The Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Development Authority Vs. Skipper Construction &

Anr.55initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against the respondents for violating directions

of the court and also for filing suit in the High Court on the same subject matter in relation to

which their special leave petition had already been dismissed. Similarly, when an affidavit,

containing allegations and casting aspersion on the court by saying that the court has made

mockery of the established policy of the Government of India, was filed in a case, 56 the

Supreme Court took suo moto cognizance of the contempt, not only against the officer of the

52
Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India & Anr. AIR 1998 SC 1895
53
Zahira Habibullah Sheikh & Anr. Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. AIR 2006 SC 1367 at page 1377
54
2016 Cri.L.J. 3734 (SC)
55
(1995) 3 SCC 507 : (1995) 1 SCALE 743
56
In Re: Sh. Sanjiv Datta & Ors. (1995) 3 SCC 619

39
Government who filed the affidavit; but, against the counsel as well. The court held that such

kind of allegations are intentional and made with full knowledge of its grave implications and

therefore has potentiality of mischief. If the same is not curbed firmly, then it may assume

proportion grave enough to sabotage the rule of law. The court further observed that officers

let your mind and not heart speak. Though, the advocate for the contemner was let of; but, the

officer was hauled up for contempt.

Recently, the Supreme Court initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against a lawyer 57 for

making two tweets on the social media network, which was taken by the court to be having

tendency of undermining the authority of the court and thereby being an act of criminal

contempt

57
In Re: Prashant Bhushan & Anr. AIR 2020 SC 4114 : 2020 (8) JT 290 : 2020 (10) SCALE 230

40
 CHAPTER VI

AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONTEMPT LAW IN INDIA

6.1 INTRODUCTION

From the Statutory Provisions and various interpretations given by the Supreme Court and the

High Courts, it becomes crystal clear that the contempt of court means any deliberate act which

hinders or obstructs the process of the court or which is calculated to lessen the authority and

dignity of the court. In other words, it is disobedience or disrespect to the court or its process.

It is an act, committed by a person in wilful contravention of the authority and dignity of the

administration of justice or tends to impede or frustrate the judicial process. A person, being

under authority of the court and a party to proceedings, willfully disobeys its lawful orders or

deliberately fails to comply with an undertaking given by him; Anyone, who scandalises or

tries to influence/overreach the court in its decision making process, will be guilty of

committing criminal contempt of court.

The powers of the contempt can be invoked by the Supreme Court

(i) Suo-Moto

(ii) (ii) Motion by the Attorney-General

(iii) (iii) On application of any party

The Supreme Court, being a superior Court of Record and also the highest court of the country,

is having the responsibility of protecting its own dignity as well as the dignity of all the courts.

Hence, the Supreme Court is having all the inherent powers, apart from the other legal and

constitutional provisions to punish the contemnors for their acts of committing contempt either

of the Supreme Court or of any other court subordinate thereto.

41
6.2 ANALYSIS OF CONTEMPT LAW IN INDIA

It is incumbent to analyse the contempt laws in the present scenario of litigation where on one

hand the incidents of contempt of court are raising day by day and on the other hand, there is a

pressing demand from certain quarter of society to abolish the contempt law, terming the same

to be against the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression.58 It is also said that

the contempt laws are being used by the courts to silence the criticism raised against them

which is against the spirit of democracy. It needs to be analysed as to how far and in what

manner the courts are exercising their power of contempt against criticism.

6.2.1 RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA VS. CONTEMPT OF COURT

The Constitution of India is the fundamental law of the land which the people of India have

given themselves to constitute India into a sovereign, socialist, secular and democratic

republic.59 Article 19(1)60 of Constitution of India gives all citizens a fundamental right to

freedom of speech and expression, besides other liberties. Right to free expression and speech

has its roots in the basic nature of human being as everybody needs to express himself. This

right of freedom of speech and express is also recognised in all the democracies across the

Globe. It has been given utmost importance since centuries. The right to freedom of speech,

enshrined in Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution is restricted by Article 19(2)61 of the

58
Adarsh Goel, Contempt of Court: Time for a Relook, available at: www.clearias.com (last accessed on
25.10.2023)
59
Preamble, The Constitution of India, Universal Lexis Nexis, Bare Act with Short Notes, 2019 at page 7
60
19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech etc.-(1) All citizens shall have the right- (a) to
freedom of speech and expression; (b) to assemble peaceably and without arms; (c) to form associations or
unions or co-operative societies; (d) to move freely throughout the territory of India; (e) to reside and settle in
any part of the territory of India; and (f) omitted [by the Constitution (Forty Forth Amendment Act 1978) w.e.f.
20.06.1979] (g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business

42
Constitution in the interest of Sovereignty & Integrity of India, Security of State, Public Order,

Decency & Morality, besides Contempt of Court and Defamation.62 So the fundamental right

given in the Constitution under Article 19 is subject to reasonable restrictions with regard to

the contempt of court. But, this does not mean that the restrictions imposed in relation to

contempt of court are absolute and the judgments of the courts can never be criticised or that

the criticism of the court of law would amount to contempt of court.

Long back in the year 1742, it was recognised that reasonable criticism, bona fide made with

reference to a judgment, is not actionable.63 But, if improper motives are attributed scandalizing

the Judge; tending to bring the administration of justice into disrepute, then the law of contempt

can certainly be set in motion.64 The Supreme Court in the case of Bathina Ramakrisha Reddy

Vs. The State of Madras,65 has held that defamatory statements about the conduct of a Judge,

even in respect of his official duties, do not necessarily constitute contempt of court. It is only

when the defamation, calculated to obstruct or interfere in the due course of justice, will amount

to contempt.

As Lord Atkin stated66 “Justice is not a cloistered virtue and it must be allowed to suffer the

scrutiny and respectful comments of an ordinary man. ... The path of criticism is a public way.

The wrong-headed are also permitted to err therein. Provided that members of the public

abstain from imputing improper motives to those taking part in the administration of justice

and are genuinely exercising a right of criticism and not acting in malice or attempting to impair

the administration of justice they are immune”. No wrong is committed by anyone while

62
Sanjay Narayan, Editor-in-Chief, The Hindustan & Ors. Vs. Hon‘ble High Court of Allahabad Thr. R.G. 2011
(10) JT 74 : 2011 (9) SCALE 532 : (2011) 13 SCC 155 : 2011 (10) SCR 781
63
In Re: Read Vs. Huggonson (1742) 2 Atk 291, referred in V.G. Ramchandran, Contempt of Court, 5th Edition
1983, Eastern Book Company, at page 51
64
Andre Paul Terence Ambard Vs. Attorney General of Trinidad AIR 1936 PC 141
65
AIR 1952 SC 149 : 1952 SCJ 137 : 1952 SCR 425
66
Ibid

43
criticizing, in good faith, in private or public, the acts done by the courts; but, he cannot be

immune from the operation of the Law of Contempt, if he acts to the contrary.

The above mentioned observations show that the public at large has the right to criticise the

judgments of the courts and the functioning of judiciary, as being their right to freedom of

speech. The situation in India is somewhat different. Though, in some of the judicial

pronouncements, the courts have recognised the right of the public to criticise the court; but,

the same is not absolute and cannot cross the limits, which appears to be in contrast with the

above observations.

In The Matter Of: Under Article 143 of the Constitution of India Vs. Unknown, 67 the President

had made a reference to the Supreme Court under peculiar circumstances which arose in the

State of U.P., wherein the contempt notices, by the Legislative Assembly, were issued to the

High Court Judges, who stayed the order of the Legislative Assembly issuing contempt notice

to one Mr. Keshav Singh, who had challenged the same before the Allahabad High Court. Chief

Justice Gajendragadkar, while dealing with the presidential reference, speaking for the seven

judges bench, observed: “Wise Judges never forget that the best way to sustain the dignity and

status of their office is to deserve respect from the public at large by the quality of their

judgments, the fearlessness, fairness and objectivity of their approach, and by the restraint,

dignity and decorum which they observe in their judicial conduct.”

A balance has to be made between the right to freedom under Article 19 of the Constitution of

India and the limitations prescribed therein vis a vis to the contempt of court. The courts are to

be respected; but, at the same time, the basic right given in the Constitution under Article 19

has also to be given due weightage. The fundamental right to speech and expression is an

67
AIR 1965 SC 745

44
integral ingredient of the democracy. It comes into play as far as public speech and publication

are concerned.68 The same cannot be suppressed in the name of contempt.

Recently, the issue of right to freedom of speech and expression came in headlines due to the

fact that the Supreme Court convicted a lawyer for writing two tweets, terming the same to be

scandalising the court, thereby committing criminal contempt.69This has led to a big debate on

the issue. A quarter of the society termed the same to be curtailing the right to freedom and

speech embodied in Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Even the demand has been raised

to scrap the initiation of contempt proceedings in the name of scandalising the court.70

6.2.1.1. ANALYSIS OF THE CASE LAWS

• PRASHANT BHUSHAN’S CASE

It was one such landmark case71 that brought the limelight to the scope of contempt of court.

As far as the facts of the case are concerned, Prashant Bhushan, who was known for his

exemplary contribution to the legal fraternity tweeted two comments on the administration of

justice by the courts and on CJI SA Bobde. Firstly, on 27 June 2020, he posted a tweet that

attributed responsibility to the Supreme Court in ‘destructing’ India’s democracy for the past

six years. The second tweet was posted on 29 June 2020 that negatively pictured the then Chief

Justice of India SA Bobde while riding a motorcycle. Although with regards to the second tweet

a petition was filed in the Court, the Supreme Court took suo moto cognizance of the petition

and initiated contempt proceedings against Prashant Bhushan on 21 July 2020.

68
Rakesh Shukla, Contempt Powers of Indian Courts Don't Measure Up to the Principles of Natural Justice,
available at: www.thewire.in (last accessed on 10.11.2023)
69
In Re: Prashant Bhushan & Anr. AIR 2020 SC 4114 : 2020 (8) JT 290 : 2020 (10) SCALE 230
70
Supra note 55 at 89
71
In Re: Prashant Bhushan and another (2020)

45
The plea of Bhushan with respect to the first tweet was that in the photo in respect of which

the tweet was made, the Chief Justice of India was not conducting any court proceedings as

such the same will not amount to any interference with the judicial functioning. Secondly, that

he was well within his rights of freedom of expression, embodied in Article 19 of the

Constitution of India, as such, there is no contempt. The plea in respect of second tweet was

that of truth. It was further contended on his behalf that not only he; but, many of the sitting

and retired judges of the Supreme Court has also made similar statements at different

places/stages. The Supreme Court did not agree with the plea of Bhushan and went on to hold

that by writing the aforesaid tweet, he undermined the administration of justice and scandalised

the court thereby committed criminal contempt of court. The Supreme Court even did not

accede to the contentions of the Ld. Attorney General72 that Bhushan has done a great service

to the development of law; particularly, in the field of public interest litigation. Accordingly,

he was convicted. The conviction of Prashant Bhushan, torched a debate on the law of

contempt. Many retired Supreme Court judges stated that the word scandalising the court is

vague and susceptible to a dubious interpretation. A retired Supreme Court judge V Gopala

Gowda stated: “The definition of criminal contempt on the ground of scandalising the court is

very vague. The word „scandalising‟ must be clarified by giving a precise definition of what

„scandalising the court‟ means. That is essential because the provision entails serious criminal

consequences.”73

Similarly, a retired Madras High Court Judge Justice Chandru stated that “Judges are using this

as a weapon to silence critics. The word „scandalises‟ is susceptible to dubious interpretation.

Therefore, it has to go. It violates Article 14 and 21 of the constitution.

72
Sruthisagar Yamunan, By refusing to hear the Attorney General in Bhushan’s Case, SC dealt a blow to another
check on power available at: www.scroll.in, (last accessed on 05.11.2023)
73
Ibid

46
The assumption that respect for the judiciary can be won by shielding judges from criticism, is

not in consonance with public opinion. The enforced silence, on the pretext of preserving the

dignity of the judiciary, would definitely cause resentment, suspicion and contempt, more than

it would enhance its respect. Rather, the same would have a chilling effect on the legitimate

criticism and will be against the very notion of the democracy.

• IN RE: ARUNDHATI ROY74

1. In this case two main questions were discussed Whether question of any motive of and

prejudice from any judges arise when a suo motu action is taken by the court for

cognizance of a criminal contempt?

2. Whether scandalizing the authorities of the court with malafide intentions amount to

criminal contempt?

In the present case, cognizance of the criminal contempt has been taken by the court,suo motu

under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. No such provisionsuch as the one made

under Section 14(2) is made under Section 15 of the said Act. The reason being that, applying

of any such provision as mentioned in Section 14(2) when an action by the court is taken under

Section 15, will deprive all the Judges the court to hear the matter and thus frustrate the

contempt proceedings. Thereby, this cannot be the mandate of law. Hence when an action is at

the instance of the court, there is no question of any motive of and prejudice from any Judge.

The Constitution of India has guaranteed freedom of speech and expression to every citizen as

a fundamental right. While guaranteeing such freedom, it has also provided under Article 129

that the Supreme Court shall be a Court of Record and shall have all the powers of such a Court

including the power to punish for contempt of itself. Similar power has been conferred on the

74
AIR 2002 SC 1375

47
High Courts of the States under Article 215. it is the same freedom of expression, which is

conferred on all citizens under Article 19(1). Any expression of opinion would, therefore, be

not immune from the liability for exceeding the limits, either under the law of defamation or

contempt of Court or the other constitutional limitations under Article 19(2). If a citizen,

therefore, in the grab of exercising right of free expression under Article 19(1), tries to

scandalise the court or undermines the dignity of the court, then the court would be entitled to

exercise power under Article 129 or Article 215, as the case may be.

• IN RE: S. MUDULGAOKAR v. UNKNOWN

The decision of the Supreme Court, in In Re: S. Mulgaokar Vs. Unknown,75is a landmark on

contempt law. The law laid down therein is popularly known as ‗Mulgaokar Principles‘. In this

case, S. Mulgaokar, the Editor of The Indian Express, was not held guilty of contempt for

publishing an article in the newspaper criticizing certain judgments during the emergency

period especially a habeas corpus petition,76 which held that even Right to Life can be

suspended during emergency. An article written by A.G. Noorani, criticizing certain decisions

of the Supreme Court, rendered during emergency period, was published in The Indian Express

Newspaper by S. Mulgaokar, the Editor thereof. The then CJI Justice M.H. Beg, felt offended

because of the criticism of the judgments in the case of ADM Jabalpur Vs. Shivkant Shukla,77

which was rendered by the bench in which Justice Beg was one of the judges. The Editor of

the newspaper was asked by the Registrar of Supreme Court, through his letter, asking for a

retraction and an apology, which did not happen; instead, the Editor offered to publish the entire

75
(1978) 3 SCC 339 : 1978 3 SCR 162
76
ADM Jabalpur Vs. Shivkant Shukla AIR 1976 SC 1207 : (1976) Sup SCR 172 : (1976) 2 SCC 521. However,
this decision was overruled by a bench of nine judges in the case of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. Vs.
Union of India & Ors. AIR 2017 SC 4161
77
AIR 1976 SC 1207 : (1976) Sup SCR 172 : (1976) 2 SCC 521

48
material which was in his possession. Hence, contempt proceedings were initiated. 78 The

Supreme Court by a majority of 2:1, held Mulgaokar not guilty for contempt. Justice Krishna

Iyer rendered the majority decision on behalf of the bench.

Justice Iyer, while delivering the majority decision, underlined his reasons for not exercising

the court‘s power to punish for contempt. Justice Iyer observed : “The Court will act with

seriousness and severity where justice is jeopardized by a gross and/or unfounded attack on

the judges, where the attack is calculated to obstruct or destroy the judicial process. The court

is willing to ignore, by a majestic liberalism, trifling and venial offenses-the dogs may bark,

the caravan will pass. The court will not be prompted to act as a result of an easy irritability,”

Freedom of expression is a fundamental right. A strong judiciary in a democratic republic is

the bulwark of masses of this country. It must work towards fulfilling the goals set out in the

constitution. If the judiciary is not functioning, keeping in mind these goals, an individual, be

it a lawyer, or a layman, has the freedom to point out the same and it cannot be said to be

criminal contempt. In all the contempt proceedings, the court should keep in mind the

fundamental right of freedom and speech, by taking into consideration the Mulgaokar

Principles as well.

• IN RE: HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI C.S. KARNAN79

This case was a contempt proceeding against Justice C.S. Karnan who was surrounded by

numerous controversies. The facts of the case were Justice Karnan, who was infamous for his

actions committed in a courtroom, accused many high court judges of being corrupt, impartial

and dependant. A notice was sent to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to take serious actions

78
Byujjaini Chatterji, Contempt, dignity and fair criticism: What do they mean to courts? Available at:
www.theleaflet.in (last accessed on 08.11.2023)
79
In Re: Hon’ble Justice Shri C.S. Karnan (2017)

49
against his fellow judges. Further, Justice Karnan accused the then Chief Justice of Madras

High Court who went against one of his decisions. Justice Karnan also accused the judges of

caste-based discrimination against him. He repetitively filed several suo moto cases against his

fellow judges who voted for his transfer even after the Supreme Court restrained him from

handling any administrative or judicial work.

The Court observed that Justice C.S. Karnan has consistently committed criminal contempt.

Justice Karnan has scandalized several judges and accused them of corruption and impartiality

without providing any evidence regarding the same. The obnoxious allegations made by him

in front of the media and the public at large tarnished the image of the courts and the beliefs of

people in the concept of justice. The conduct of the contemnor was both scandalising the court

as well as interfering with the court’s proceedings. The Court was seemingly shocked at the

behaviour of Justice Karnan and stated that his actions constituted the grossest and gravest

actions of contempt of court. The Court held him guilty for criminal contempt of court and

sentenced him to 6 months imprisonment.

However, the case suffered several atrocities as the procedure followed by the Court was not

proper. The Supreme Court formed a 7 judges bench for the case that is generally instituted in

exceptional cases. Further, the written apology given by Justice Karnan was ignored by the

Court. The Court failed to formulate any substantial issue underlying the case. The decision

was also taken in a hush as no amicus curiae was appointed in the case which was an important

step and should be observed by the Court.

• HARI SINGH NAGRA v. KAPIL SIBAL80

80
Hari Singh Nagra and others Vs Kapil Sibal and others (2010)

50
In this case, the concept of fair and reasonable criticism was established with respect to

contempt proceedings. Referring to the facts of the case, advocate Kapil Sibal along with others

sent a souvenir to be published by an association of lawyers while expressing his concern about

the plight of the junior members of the Bar and the falling standards of the legal fraternity.

Initially, the souvenir was neither published in the public domain nor was made available for

sale, rather it was distributed only among the members of the Bar. However, when the

respondent was contesting the elections for the Supreme Court Bar Association, certain

excerpts of his souvenir were published in the Times of India newspaper. It was then claimed

by the petitioners that the said souvenir was deliberated to bring disrepute to the administration

of justice and the functioning of the courts.

The Court has stepped beyond the narrow confines of the contempt proceedings and established

the concept of “fair” criticism. The Court observed that any ridicule brought towards the judges

and the courts, that hampers the confidence and belief of the public thereby deteriorating the

foundation of justice must be prevented at all times. But any criticism which is reasonable,

rational and sober, not coloured by any tactics must be welcomed. In accordance with Article

19(1)(a) of the Constitution, freedom of speech and expression when used by the Press and the

people to fairly criticize any judgment of the court, then no criminal contempt is said to be

committed in such cases. Rather it is treated as a necessary right of the people. Therefore, fair

and reasonable criticism on the working of the judges and the courts can be made without

condemning it as contempt of court.

• ABHYUDAYA MISHRA v. KUNAL KAMRA

The case of Abhyudaya Mishra v. Kunal Kamra was initiated in the year 2020 and is still under

trial. But, the case has brought the concept of contempt of court into the limelight. The famous

51
stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra has been alleged to have scandalised the court by degrading

its authority through the publication of tweets on social media. The said tweets criticised the

Supreme Court for the way it fast-tracked the bail plea of Arnab Goswami, the Chief of

Republic TV, in abetment to a suicide case. Attorney General KK Venugopalan gave his assent

to initiate the contempt proceedings against Kamra stating that his tweets were of bad taste and

that it was time for people to understand attacking the Supreme Court brazenly would attract

punishment. In January 2021, the respondent claimed that the jokes are not reality and do not

claim to be so and the fact that mere claims can shake the foundation of the Supreme Court

will be an overestimation. To this reply of the respondent some rejoinders were requested to

which the court gave assent

52
 CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

Law ensures uniformity and certainty in the administration of justice and protects the fountain

of justice from being polluted by improper motives. The Judicial process is based on probity,

fairness and impartiality which is unimpeachable.422 Any conduct, by which the course of

justice is perverted, either by the party or a stranger, is contempt. Contempt of court can be said

to have been committed by any conduct which tends to bring the authority of the court and

administration of justice to disrespect or disregard. Meaning thereby, the contempt of court is

a matter which relates to the authority and dignity of the courts/judicial tribunals and

administration of justice.423 The idea is to preserve the judicial process from any external

interference and to keep the same pure. The impartial judicial system is the backbone of

administration of justice, without which no democracy can survive and the courts cannot have

the faith of the public There is a purpose behind everything so is the case with the present

research. Through this research, the researcher has travelled a long back history of judicial

system of India to trace the concept and history of the powers of contempt of courts including

Ancient India, Mughal Era and lastly from British Era till date i.e. the present judicial system.

How the powers of contempt of court has been developed in the present judicial system, what

were the difficulties faced by the administrators and how the law has moved and ultimately has

taken the present shape.

The law is a very vast and progressive field and therefore it is very difficult to claim perfection;

but, there is gain saying that the improvement is an ongoing process. There can be a number of

suggestions for improvement of the powers of contempt of courts, its mode and manner; but,

on the basis of little knowledge and from the deep study on the subject A Critical Study of

53
Contempt of Court in India, the researcher proposes mainly the following

suggestions/recommendations/remedial measures:

(i) The term scandalising the court should be specifically and concisely defined in the

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 so that it may not be susceptible to any misuse.

(ii) (ii) Truth should be a valid defence without any limitation and the court should not

have any discretion whether to permit the truth as a valid defence or not.

(iii) (iii) The powers for contempt should be used by the courts sparingly and only in

very grave cases of contempt.

(iv) (iv) Except in the cases of contempt in the face of the Court, the powers for criminal

contempt should not be used.

(v) (v) Due regard should be given by the court to the fundamental right of the citizen,

in exercise of contempt powers, particularly Right to Freedom of Expression &

Speech and Right to Life and Personal Liberty, which are the inseparable elements

of democracy.

(vi) (vi) The court should be open to fair criticism as any other organ of the State, which

will enhance the respect for the court.

The power to punish for contempt is a special power. This is a drastic power which, if mis-

directed, can take away the liberty of an individual, who is charged with the commission of

contempt. The very nature of this power cast a solemn duty upon the courts to exercise it with

greatest care and caution, only where there is gross contempt. The court, before invoking such

a drastic power, must consider every circumstance of the case and also the effect of the exercise

of its power of contempt.

54
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

STATUTES

The Constitution of India, 1950

The Contempt of Courts (Amendment) Act, 1976

The Contempt of Courts (Amendment) Act, 2006

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 14 The Contempt of Courts Act, 1952

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

BOOKS

Durga Das Basu, Shorter Constitution of India, (Wadhwa Publications, Nagpur, 13th Edition,

2001)

M.P. Jain, Outlines of Indian Legal History, (Wadhwa & Company Law Publishers, Nagpur,

5th Edition, reprint 1999)

Justice J D Kapoor, Law of Contempt of Court, (Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Delhi,

2004)

Justice Jois Rama M., Legal and constitutional history of India (Ancient Legal, Judicial and

Constitutional System), (Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, 1st edition 1984,

reprint 2005)

V.G. Ramchandran, Contempt of Court, (Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 5th Edition, 1983)

V.G. Ramchandran, Contempt of Court, (Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 6th Edition, 2002,

reprint 2005), Revised by Justice (Retd.) V.K. Mehrotra

55
Subba Rao G.C.V., Commentary of Contempt of Courts Act 1971, (ALT Publication,

Hyderababad, 2016)

REPORTS

Consultation Paper on Contempt of Court, The Law Reforms Commission, Ireland, July 1991

Law Commission of India, 200th Report dated 31.08.2006 on ‘Trial by Media’.

Law Commission of India, Report No. 274, on ‘Review of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971’,

April 2018. The Rajya Sabha Debates on the Contempt of Courts Bill, dated 27.11.1968

JOURNALS

Adoksh, Government of India Act 1915, www.legalservicesindia.com

Ajay Chaudhary, Right to Freedom of Speech & Expression in Contrast with Contempt of

Court in India, Innovation The Research Concept, Vol.-6, Issue-1, February-2021

Babde Vinod A., Do we want our Judges to be Lions or Mice: Judicial Accountability and

Judicial Independence, AIR 2007 Journal 17

Blog of Justice Madan B Lokur, dated 09.01.2021, www.livelaw.in 7. Chatterji Byujjaini,

Contempt, dignity and fair criticism: What do they mean to courts? dated 23.08.2020, The

Leaflet, www.theleaflet.in

Chauhan Dinesh Singh, The Historical Perspective of the Contempt of Courts in India,

www.legalserviceindia.com

56
Petitioner Uses Vulgar Language In VC Hearing: Bombay High Court Shows 'Judicial Grace

& Magnanimity' To Avoid Issuing Contempt Notice, dated 07.01.2021, www.livelaw.in

WEBSITES

www.hrw.org

www.indialawlibrary.com

www.indiankanoon.org

www.lawcommissionofindia.nic.in

www.lawyerservices.in

www.legalserviceindia.com

www.livelaw.in

www.prsindia.org

CASES CITED

A.M. Mathur Vs. Pramod Kumar Gupta (1990) 2 SCC 533

ADM Jabalpur Vs. Shivkant Shukla AIR 1976 SC 1207

Advocate General, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Vs. Ramana Rao AIR 1967 AP 299

Andre Paul Terence Ambard Vs. Attorney General of Trinidad AIR 1936 PC 141

Attorney-General For New South Wales Vs. Mundey (1972) 2 NSWLR 887

57
Bihar State Government Secondary School Teachers Association Vs. Ashok Kumar Sinha &

Ors. AIR 2014 SC 2824

Chandramani Kanhar Vs. State of Odisha 2020 SCC OnLine Ori 930

Court on its own motion Vs. Balbir Singh Saini 2008 Cri.L.J. (NOC) 196 (P&H)

Deepak Kumar Yadav Vs. K.K. Mishra @ Balram 2016 Cri.L.J. 3861 (Alld)

Dhananjay Kumar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan 2006 Cri.L.J. 3873

Dinesh Kumar Gupta Vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. (2010) 12 JT 81

G. Hari Prasad Vs. Chief Conservator of Forests AIR 1959 MAD 406

Gyani Chand Vs. State of A.P. AIR 2016 SC 4403

In Re: S. Mulgaokar Vs. Unknown (1978) 3 SCC 339

In Re: Blog Published by Justice Markandey Katju dated 17.09.2016-Titled Soumya Murder

Case, Suo Moto Contempt Petition (Criminal) No. 4 Of 2016 dated 11-11-2016

In Re: Hari Jai Singh AIR 1997 SC 73

In Re: Hon‟ble Sh. Justice C.S. Karnan 2017 SCC OnLine SC 562

In Re: Yegnanarayaniah (1974) 1 MLJ 155

In Re: Prashant Bhushan & Anr. AIR 2020 SC 4114 : 2020 (8) JT 290 : 2020 (10) SCALE 230

Kesavananda Bharti Vs. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

Municipal Corporation Jabalpur Vs. Om Praksh Dubey AIR 2007 SC 893

The Bangalore Development Authority Vs. Gururaj & Anr. 2008 Cri.L.J. (NOC) 320 (Kar.)

Zahira Habibullah Sheikh & Anr. Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. AIR 2006 SC 1367

58
59