M.B.

SANGHI ADVOCATE VS HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

Petitioner – M.B. SANGHI

Respondent – High Court of Punjab & Haranya

Date of Judgement – 31.07.1991

Bench – Justice A.M Ahmadi, Justice S.C Agarwal

Citation – 1991 AIR SC 1834

➢ What is contempt of court?

Contempt of court, often referred to simply as “contempt” is the offence of

being disobedient or disrespectful towards a court of law and its officers in the
form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice and dignity of
the court.

➢ How many contempt of court are there?

There are two types of contempt:

1. Civil Contempt
2. Criminal Contempt

1) Civil Contempt:
Section 2 (b) of the Contempt of Court Act 1971 provides that the under –
mentioned action would result in civil contempt –
A. Willful disobedience to any judge, decree, direction, order, court process
B. Willful breach of an under to a court
2) Criminal Contempt:
Section 2 (c) of the Act provides that the following acts would result in criminal
contempt of court-
A. Publication in the words, which may be spoken or return or through signs
or visible representation of any matter.
B. Any other acts whatsoever that scandalizes, lower or tend to lower the
authority of any court or prejudices interference with tends to interfere with
all or obstruct or tends to obstruct the administration of justice.

According to Section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act 1971, contempt of court can
be punished with simple imprisonment for a term that may extend to 6 weeks with a
fine that may extend to Rupees 2000 or with both.

Facts of the case:

1. In this case, the appellant, M.B. Sanghi was representing the plaintiff prayed
for an Ex-parte ad interim order, but the court decline his request.
*Ex-parte ad Interim order:
(An ad interim injunction granted without notice to the respondent would also come under
the purview of “ex-parte” order. This would make the position clear that the term “ex-parte”
stands for an order passed or a decree passed in the absence of other party.)

2. During the case was in the motion and some of the filling of document was to
be done. An ex-parte ad interim order was asked for by respondent, and it was
provided for them. Unable to secure an ad interim stay in favor of his client.
 3. M.B. Sanghi uttered certain words in putting motives to the sub-judge in
refusing to grant a stay. The plaintiff asked the judges whether he was a setting
judge or a contractor to the Municipal Committee.
4. The sub-judge submitted a report to the District and Session judge sitting out
the words uttered by the appellant. The District and Session Judge in turn
submitted a report to the High Court and proceeding for contempt were
initiated by the High Court.
5. In the contempt proceeding, M.B Sanghi denied uttering the words mentioned
in the report of the Sub- Judge and offered him and unqualification apology.
But the High Court held that the appellant was guilty of contempt of court
under Section 2 (c) (i) of the Contempt Court Act 1971, as he had attacked the
integrity of the sub judge of the sub judge.
6. The High Court did not accept the appellant apology and also mentioned that
the appellant was addicted to using contemptuous language against the judges
as there had been a discharge contempt proceeding against him prior to this
case.
7. The High Court sentenced him for two months imprisonment.
8. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 19(3) of

Contempt of Court Act, 1971 before the Supreme Court. It was contended that
he did not utter the word mentioned by the sub judge in his report. He also
presented three advocate witnesses stating that the appellant did not use any
unparliamentary or foul language towards the sub judge.

Issue:

I. Is there a contempt of court in this case?

II. Was the rejection of the appellant justifiable?
Judgement:

• The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal by saying that the appellant frequently
used contemptuous language against the judges. It was added that, as a senior
advocate, an apology for disparaging remarks against judges cannot be accepted.
The Supreme Court judge also justified the High court’s decision. Here, the
appellant was found guilty of Contempt of Court Act 1971. It was also found that
this is the first time the appellant is facing a contempt proceeding. So, the appeal
was dismissed the Supreme Court.
• In reference to the judgment of the High Court, accepting the apology of a senior
advocate for attacking the integrity of a judge may encourage other legal
professionals to behave in a similar way. It was also noted that incident of using
improper language toward the judges.

AYUSH MISHRA
A-37
BBA LLB (3RD YEAR)