Concept of Contempt of court

 CONCEPT OF CONTEMPT OF COURT 

BY NUPUR GARG

INTRODUCTION 

In India, under Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 defines contempt of court as civil contempt or criminal contempt, it is generally felt that the existing law relating to contempt of courts is somewhat uncertain, undefined and unsatisfactory. The jurisdiction to punish for contempt touches upon two important fundamental rights of the citizens, namely, the right to personal liberty and the right to freedom of expression. It was, therefore, considered advisable to have the entire law on the subject scrutinized by a special committee.

In pursuance of this, a committee was set up in 1961 under the chairmanship of the late H N Sanyal, the then additional solicitor general. The committee made a comprehensive examination of the law and problems relating to contempt of court in the light of the position obtaining in our own country and various foreign countries. The recommendations, which the committee made, took note of the importance given to freedom of speech in the Constitution and of the need for safeguarding the status and dignity of courts and interests of administration of justice.

The recommendations of the committee have been generally accepted by the government after considering the view expressed on those recommendations by the state governments, union territory administrations, the Supreme Court, the high courts and the judicial commissioners.

CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT,1971

1. The act defines the power of courts to punish for their contempt and regulates their procedure.

2. It was amended in 2006 to include the defence of truth under Section 13 of the original legislation. Implying that the court must permit justification by truth as a valid defence if it is satisfied that it is in the public interest.

Indian Polity

Prev Next

Contempt of Court

16 Nov 2019 4 min read

Tags: GS Paper - 2Judiciary

Why in News

Recently, the Supreme Court of India has held former Ranbaxy promoters guilty of contempt for violating its order.

The expression ‘contempt of court’ has not been defined by the Constitution.

As per the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, contempt refers to the offence of showing disrespect to the dignity or authority of a court.

The act divides contempt into civil and criminal contempt.

Civil contempt: It is willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other processes of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to the court.

Criminal contempt: It is any publication which may result in:

Scandalising the court by lowering its authority.

Interference in the due course of a judicial proceeding.

An obstruction in the administration of justice.

However, innocent publication and distribution of some matter, fair and reasonable criticism of judicial acts and comment on the administrative side of the judiciary do not amount to contempt of court.

PUNISHMENTS FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT

1. The supreme court and high courts have the power to punish for contempt of court, either with simple imprisonment for a term up to six months or with fine up to 2,000 or with both.

2. In 1991, the Supreme Court has ruled that it has the power to punish for contempt not only of itself but also of high courts, subordinate courts and tribunals functioning in the entire country.

3. On the other hand, High Courts have been given special powers to punish contempt of subordinate courts, as per Section 10 of The Contempt of Courts Act of 1971.

TYPES OF CONTEMPT 

Civil Contempt

Under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, civil contempt has been defined as willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a court.

Criminal Contempt

Under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, criminal contempt has been defined as the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, 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.

CASE:

In the case of Ashok Paper Kamgar Union and Ors. vs Dharam Godha and Ors., proviso of section 2 (b) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 which defines the term civil contempt was thoroughly examined by the Supreme Court. The court held that the term “willful” under this particular section means an act or omission that is carried out intentionally and voluntarily with a specific intent to do something that the law forbids or to fail to do something which the law requires to be done. In short, with a bad purpose either to disregard or disobey the law. This mainly signifies a deliberate action which is done with an evil intent or with a bad motive. Thus, for an act to constitute contempt the order of the court must be of such a nature which is capable of being executed by a person charged in normal circumstances. It shouldn’t require any sort of an extraordinary effort and nor should it be, either wholly or in part, dependent on any omission or act of a third party for their compliance. Civil contempt also involves willful breach of an undertaking.