Clinical Assignment (Nikhat)
Clinical Assignment (Nikhat)
Clinical Assignment (Nikhat)
FACULTY OF LAW
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
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
1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 2
3. CHAPTER I 6-15
INTRODUCTION
LAW 8-9
4. CHAPTER II 16-19
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
2.1 INTRODUCTION 16
PERIOD
PERIOD)
3
5. CHAPTER III 20-30
STATUTORY PROVISION
3.1 INTRODUCTION 20
CONTEMPT
4. CHAPTER IV 31-35
COURT
5. CHAPTER V 36-40
5.1 INTRODUCTION 36
CONTEMPT OF COURT
4
6. CHAPTER VI 41-52
6.1 INTRODUCTION 41
51
• HARI SINGH NAGRA v. KAPIL SIBAL
52
• ABHYUDAYA MISHRA v. KUNAL KAMRA
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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.
(v) Based on the above, the reforms and remedial measures for the protection of
12
1.7 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
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
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
• CHAPTER I, INTRODUCTION
13
The first chapter gives an introduction of the study regarding contempt of court in
India.
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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.
In 1908-09, Lord Minto‘s Government consulted all the Provincial Governments as to whether
(i) to enable High Courts other than Chartered High Courts to protect themselves in
20
(ii) to empower all High Courts to give a reasonable measure of protection to courts
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
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
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
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
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
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
Though, the Act of 1952 largely re-enacted the provisions contained in the 1926 Act; but, cured
(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
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
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
set up by the Government in 1961 under the Chairmanship of late Shri H. N. Sanyal, the then
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
accepted by the Government. The Parliament, after considering the views expressed by 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
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-
b) "civil contempt" means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order,
signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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,
Likewise, the Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 also prescribes the
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:
b. Article 129
d. Article 215
“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
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
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
30
CHAPTER IV
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
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
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.
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.
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
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 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
(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
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.
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
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
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
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
“(a) whether the Supreme Court has inherent jurisdiction or power to punish for contempt of
(b) Whether the inherent jurisdiction and power of the Supreme Court is restricted by the
(c) whether the incident interfered with the due administration of justice and constituted
(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
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
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
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
(i) Suo-Moto
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
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.
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,
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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,”
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
52
CHAPTER VII
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
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
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
(iv) (iv) Except in the cases of contempt in the face of the Court, the powers for criminal
(v) (v) Due regard should be given by the court to the fundamental right of the citizen,
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
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
54
BIBLIOGRAPHY
STATUTES
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 14 The Contempt of Courts Act, 1952
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,
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,
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, 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
Ajay Chaudhary, Right to Freedom of Speech & Expression in Contrast with Contempt of
Babde Vinod A., Do we want our Judges to be Lions or Mice: Judicial Accountability and
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
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
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 &
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)
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
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: Hon‟ble Sh. Justice C.S. Karnan 2017 SCC OnLine SC 562
In Re: Prashant Bhushan & Anr. AIR 2020 SC 4114 : 2020 (8) JT 290 : 2020 (10) SCALE 230
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