Introduction

0rigin of contempt of court

History of law of contempt of court
Essential of contempt of court
Types of contempt of court in India
Punishment for contempt of court
Proceedings Contempt
Land Mark Contempt Judgements
Case Laws
Conclusion
Bibliography
INTRODUCTION

The term 'Contempt of Court' is a gener c term descriptive of conduct in relation to

part1icular proceedings in a court of law which tends to undermine that system or
to inhibit citizens from availing themselves of 1i t for the settlement of their
disputes."This definition is given by Lord Diplock when he was giving the
judgment in the case of Attorney-General.
This term Contempt of Court can be easily understood as when we are
disrespectful or disobedience towards the court of law which means that we
wilfully fail to obey the court order or dosrespect the legal authorities. Then the
judge has the right to om pose sanctoons such as fines or can send the contemnor
to jail for a certain period of time if he is found guilty of Contempt of Court.
In India, the concept of Contempt of Court is defined in Section 2(a) of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 which has broadly describe it as civil contempt or
criminal contempt.

There are two Articles in the Constitution of India which talk about the Contempt
of Court and these are Article 129 and Article 142(2).
Article 129 says that the Supreme Court shall be the 'Court of Record' and it has all
the powers of such courts including the power to punish for contempt of itself
Origin of Contempt of Court

The legal system that we see today is the summit of the long journey which has
started from the divine rule that was in proclamation to the natural law and more
further to the positive law that we see today. Contempt of Court is a matter which
regards that justice should be administered fairly and it also punishes anyone who
aims to hurt the dignity or authority of the judicial tribunals. This law has its origin
from the medieval times when the royal powers of the monarch were transferred to
the court and at this time the monarch was believed to be appointed by God and
everyone was accountable to him. This power of accountability clearly depicts the
same accountability the Supreme Court possesses nowadays under Article 129 and
142 of the Indian constitution against its contempt. In the English medieval ages
the Judiciary was an important tool of the Monarch. At that time these judges and
legislatures were representatives of the divine rule monarchy and these judges and
legislatures played an important role in legitimizing the functions of these
monarchs. The king was the superior head of justice and this power he has given to
the judicial system and if anyone or the king himself disrespect or question the
courts it became a challenge to the superiority of the king and as well as to his
wisdom. So, this can be seen as although the source of the law has transformed in
the society the unquestionability quality that a king enjoyed was upheld by the
monarchy. There is a case of contempt against J. Almon in the year 1765; a
statement was made by the Irish judge Sir Eardley Wilmot in regard to this
contempt attacks on the judges. In this case, Almon has published a pamphlet
libelling the decision of the bench of kings and the judgment given by the judge
had given rise to many questions of several aspects of the judiciary which had not
been questioned yet. This matter gives a great push in the establishment of the
contempt of court. This judgement also recognised that the unbiasedness is also
one of the features of the judiciary in making the decision which makes this
institution different from its peer institutions.

History of Law of Contempt in India

Sanyal Committee report deals with the historical aspect of the Law of Contempt
in India. This committee has been responsible for starting the amendment process
in this law. The law of contempt similar to many other laws has been brought from
the English laws and statutes but this law has not been absolutely taken from the
English laws it has other origins too. How has the indigenous development of
contempt law taken place? It can be understood by the age-old system which our
country was having to protect court or assemblies (sabhas) in the past. We know
about the philosopher Kautilya, in his book Arthashastra has written about the
governance at that time. He has written that "Any person who exposes the king or
insults his council or make any type of bad attempt on the kings then the tongue of
that
person should be cut off." Adding to this statement, he also said that "When a
judge threatens, bully or make silence to any of the disputants in the court then he
should be punished."

Until the year 1952, there were no statutory provisions for the contempt of court in
India but after the enactment of Contempt of Court Act, 1952 statutory provisions
for contempt of court in India has established. This Act extends to the whole of
India except Jammu and Kashmir. This Act gives power to the High Court to
punish contempt of the subordinate court. This Act has repealed the existing law
from the Contempt of Court Act, 1926 that was prevailing in the state of Rajasthan
and the state of Saurashtra.
Although this Act was extended to the whole of Bangladesh. It can be surprising
knowing that although these Acts have been introduced earlier then also these Acts
do not give the definition of the term 'Contempt' and also there was still a lot of
ambiguity present around the law of contempt. This law has to be dealt with in
light of two fundamental rights given by our Indian Constitution and these rights
are (i) freedom of speech and expression and (ii) right to personal liberty.

There was a bill introduced in the Lok Sabha to make any changes or to make the
existing law relating to contempt more strong.
This law was introduced by Shri B B Das Gupta on 1st of April 1960. The
government after examining the bill discern the need for reform in the existing
Act. So, they made a special committee to look into the matter or inspect the
existing Act. This committee was set up in 1961, under the chairmanship of H.N.
Sanyal which gives its report on 28th February, 1963. The report of this committee
took the form of Contempt of Court Act, 1971. The procedure and application of
enactment something that was done earlier by the Contempt of Court Act of 1926
and 1952 was given several changes through the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
This Act segregates the 'Contempt of Court' into criminal and civil contempt with
their definition respectively. This thing was not mentioned in the earlier existing
courts. Now, let us know something about the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.

Contempts of Courts Act 1971 notes

This Act extended to the whole of India and it has also provided that this Act shall
not apply to the state of Jammu and Kashmir except in certain conditions in which
the provision of the Act is connected to the Contempt of Supreme Court. Another
thing is that this Act provides the definition of Contempt of Court which has not
been given by the earlier Act of Contempt of Court. This Act under Section 2(a)
defines Contempt of Court as 'Civil Contempt' and 'Criminal Contempt'. There is a
case of Noorali Babul Thanewala v. K.M.M. Shetty in which an undertaking was
given to a Court in civil proceedings by a person, on the faith that undertaking was
correct the Court sanctions a course of action in regard to that undertaking but the
undertaking seems to be incorrect. Hence, this was considered as misconduct and
amount to Contempt of Court. In this act there are several provisions

Contempts of Courts Act 1971

This Act extended to the whole of India and it has also provided that this Act shall
not apply to the state of Jammu and Kashmir except in certain conditions in which
the provision of the Act is connected to the Contempt of Supreme Court. Another
thing is that this Act provides the definition of Contempt of Court which has not
been given by the earlier Act of Contempt of Court. This Act under Section 2(a)
defines Contempt of Court as 'Civil Contempt' and 'Criminal Contempt'. There is a
case of Noorali Babul Thanewala v. K.M.M. Shetty in which an undertaking was
given to a Court in civil proceedings by a person, on the faith that undertaking was
correct the Court sanctions a course of action in regard to that undertaking but the
undertaking seems to be incorrect. Hence, this was considered as misconduct and
amount to Contempt of Court. In this act there are several provisions given that it
does not amount to Contempt of Court. Although, these provisions have to be
discussed later in this article some of them you should know at this point in time.
These are: (i) innocent publication of a matter or its distribution does not amount
to Contempt of Court. (ii) publishing of fair and accurate reports of the Judicial
proceedings does not amount to Contempt of Court. (iii) fair criticism on judicial
acts does not amount to Contempt of Court. Next, in this Act, the High Court has
been given the power to make decisions on the matter which is outside its
jurisdiction. Punishment for Contempt of Court has been given in this Act and also
what type of misconduct not amount to Contempt of Court has been given, how we
can deal with that contempt has also been given. The Judge, Magistrate or any
other person who is acting judicially can also be contempt for their actions. Also,
this Act gives certain limitations where this Act does not apply. This Act does not
apply to the Courts of Nyaya Panchayat and other Courts of the village. This Act
repealed the old existing Act of Contempt of Court which came into force in 1952.

Essentials of Contempt of Court

If a person named Akash has to prove that the other person named Sita is guilty of
committing an act which is an offence in a court of law. Then he has to show the
court that the offence which Sita has done is fulfilling the essential required to
commit that act or not. If the essentials of that will be fulfilled then he will be
liable for that act. Similarly, every offence has certain
exceptions that has to be fulfilled for making the person liable for doing that act.
Contempt of Court also has certain essentials and these are as follows:
Disobedience to any type of court proceedings, its orders, judgment, decree, etc
should be done 'willfully' in case of Civil Contempt.
In Criminal Contempt 'publication' is the most important thing and this publication
can be either spoken or written, or by words, or by signs, or by visible
representation.
The court should make a 'valid order' and this order should be in 'knowledge' of the
respondent.
The action of contemnor should be deliberate and also it should be clearly
disregard of the court's order.
These essentials should be fulfilled while making someone accused of Contempt of
Court.

Types of Contempt of Court in India

Depending on the nature of the case in India, Contempt of Court is of two types.

Civil Contempt Criminal Contempt

Civil Contempt
Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 states Civil Contempt as wilful
disobedience to the order, decree, direction, any judgment or writ of the Court by
any person or willfully breach of undertakings by a person given to a Court. Since
Civil Contempt deprives a party of the benefit for which the order was made so
these are the offences essential of private nature. In other words, a person who is
entitled to get the benefit of the court order, this wrong is generally done to this
person.

There is a case on the willful disobedience of the court order which a person
should know.

Utpal Kumar Das v. Court of the Munsiff, Kamrup

This is the case of non-rendering of assistance, althoug,l, the court has ordered to
render assistance. Decree executed by the coU'rt to deliver immovable property but
because of certain obstruction, the defendant failed to do so. He ce, he was held
liable for constituting disobedience to t e orders of the competent Civil Cou rt.

Another case is on the breach of an undertaking which leads to Contempt of Court.

U.P. Resi. Emp. Co-op., House B. Society v. New Okhla Industrial Development
Authority
In this case, the Supreme Court has directed the Noida Authorities to verify and
state on the affidavit details given by persons for allotment of plots. In pursuance
to the same direction by the Supreme Court a person Mr. S filed a false affidavit to
mislead the court. The Registry directed a show-cause notice against him to say
that why an act of contempt should not be taken against him for misleading the
Supreme Court.

Defences to Civil Contempt

A person who is accused of Civil Contempt of case can take the following
defences:

Lack of Knowledge of the order: A person can not be held liable for Contempt of
Court if he does not know the order given by the court or he claims to be unaware
of the order. There is a duty binding on the successful party by the courts that the
order that has passed should be served to the Individual by the post or personally
or through the certified copy. It can be successfully pleaded by the contemner that
the certified copy of the order was not formally served to him.
The disobedience or the breach done should not be : If someone
is pleading under this defence then he can say that the act done by him was not
done willfully, it was just a mere accident or he/she can say that it is beyond their
control. But this plead can only be successful if it found to be reasonable otherwise
your plead can be discarded.
The order that has disobeyed should be vague or ambiguous: If the order passed by
the court is vague or ambiguous or this order is not specific or complete in itself
then a person can get the defence of contempt if he says something against that
order. In
R.N. Ramaul v. State of Himachal Pradesh [5], this defence has been taken by the
respondent. In this case, the Supreme Court has directed the corporation of the
respondent to restore the promotion of the petitioner from a particular date in the
service. But the respondent has not produced the monetary benefit for the given
period and a complaint was filed against him for Contempt of Court. He pleads for
the defence on the given evidence that it has not mentioned by the court in order to
pay the monetary benefit. Finally, he gets the defence.
Orders involve more than one reasonable interpretation: If the contempt of any
order declared by the court and the order seems to be given more than one
reasonable and rational interpretation and the respondent adopts one of those
interpretations and works in accordance with that then he will not be liable for
Contempt of Court.
Command of the order is impossible: If compliance of the order is impossible or it
can not be done easily then it would be taken as a defence in the case of Contempt
of Court. However, one should
differentiate the case of impossibility with the case of mere difficulties. Because
this defence can be given only in the case of the impossibility of doing an order.
Criminal Contempt
According to Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, Criminal Contempt
is Defined as (i) the publication of any matter by words, spoken or written, or by
gesture, or by signs, or by visible representation or (ii) doing of any act which
includes: a)
Scandalize or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of any
court, or
Biasness, interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any type of Judicial
proceedings, or
obstructs or tends to obstruct, onterfere or tend to interfere with the administration
of justice in any manner.

Punishment for Contempt of Court

Section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 deals with the punishment for
Contempt of Court. High Court and the Supreme Court have been given the power
to punish someone for the Contempt of Court. Section 12(1) of this Act states that
a person who alleged with the Contempt of Court can be punished with simple
imprisonment and this imprisonment can extend to six months, or with fine which
may extend to two thousand rupees or can be of both type punishment. However,
an accused may be discharged or the punishment that was awarded to him maybe
remitted on the condition that if he makes an apology and this apology should
satisfy the court then only he can be exempted from the punishment of Contempt
of Court. Explanation of this sentence is that if the accused made an apology in the
bona fide then this apo ogy shall not be rejected on the ground that it

is conditional or qualified.

The court can not impose a sentence for Contempt of Court in excess of
what is prescribed under the given section of this Act either in respect of itself or
of a court subordinate to ot.

Remedies against an order of Punishment

Section 13 has been added in the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 after amendment in
2006. The new Act may be called The Contempt of Court (Amendment) Act,
2006. This Section tells that contempt of court cannot be punished under certain
circumstances or certain cases.

Clause (a) of Section 13 of the Contempt of Court (Amendment) Act, 2006 states
that no Court under this Act shall be punoshed for Contempt of Court unless it is
satisfied that the Contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes or tend
to substantially interfere with the due course of Justice.
Clause (b) of Section 13 of this Act states that the court may give the defence on
the justification of truth if it finds that the act done in the publoc interest and the
request for invoking that defence os bona fide.

Contempt Proceedings
Two Sections of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 deals woth the procedure
of Contempt proceeding. One talks about the proceeding in the face of the court of
records and other ta ks about the proceedings other than the court of records.

Section 14 of the Contempt of Court deals with the procedure of contempt

proceeding in the face of the court of record whereas Section 15 of this Act deals
with the procedure of the contempt proceeding outside the court of records.

These courts of record have got the power to punish for its contempt inherently.
Therefore, these courts of record can deal with the matter of content by making
their own procedure. Whol e exercising the contempt jurisdiction by the courts of
record the only case to be observed is that the procedure adopted must be faor and
reasonable in which the alleged contemnor should be goven full opportunity to
defend himself. If the specific charge against the person who is punished for the
contempt is distinctly stated and he is given a reasonable opportunity to answer
and to defend himself against the charge then only he will be liable for contempt of
court and the court proceeding runs against him. Where the person charged with
contempt under this section applies whether orally or in writing to have the charge
against him, tried by some judge other than the judge or judges in whose presence
or hearong the contempt os alleged to have been committed and the court is of the
opinion that it is necessary in the interest of justice that th@ application should be
allowed, it shall cause the matter to be transferred before such judge as the Chi1ef
Justice may think fit and proper under the circumstances of the case or placed
before the Chief Justice with the statement of facts of the case.
Criminal contempt and criminal defamation proceedings
A question has been asked by the person that can an action for criminal contempt
and criminal defamation initiated simultaneously. This can be understood by
knowong the concept of Criminal contempt and criminal defamation. Earlier, in
this article, we have talked about Criminal Contempt. But for an overview, we
should know what does a criminal contempt mean. According to Section 2(c) of
the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, criminal contempt is defined as (i) the
publication of any matter by words, spoken or written, or by gestures, or by signs,
or by visible representation or (ii) doing of any act which includes:

Scandalize or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of any

court, or
Biasness, interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any type of Judicial
proceedings, or
obstructs or tends to obstruct, onterfere or tend to interfere with the administration
of justice in any manner.
Now, we will know the concept of criminal defamation.

The definition of criminal defamation has been given under Section 499 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860. It states about defamation that "Whoever, by words
either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representatoons,
makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or
knowing or having reason to believe that such
imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases
hereinafter expected, to defame that person."

There are certain exceptions of criminal defamation and these are:

If the publication of anyth ong is in truth and for publoc good then it cannot be
treated as defamation.
Wl.ien a person touches a,11y pU1b lic questions then for that he cannot be liable.
If the publicatoon is of the reports of the proceedings of the court.

As the right to reputation is an im portari t facet of the right to life and personal
liberty guaranteed under Article 2] of the Indian Con stitution, hence, the aim of
the criminal defamation is to prevent a person from maligning narming the
reputation of others by usii11g absurd or malign words wit malafide ntentions.

In the case of Dr. Subramanian Swamy vs. Union of India (UOI), Ministry of Law
and Ors. [9] the constitutional validity of the criminal defamation was upheld.

Limitation
Section 20 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 deals with the lomit ation for
the action of Contempt. It states that no court shall initiate any proceedings of
contempt in two conditions:

Either th@ proceedings ar@ on his own motion, or,

After the period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have
been committed.
Landmark Contempt Judgments
Supreme Court Bar Association vs Union Of India & Anr
In this case, the Judge held that procedural aspect for Contempt of Court may still
be prescribed by the Parliament so that it could be applicab e in the Supreme Court
and the High Court. This means that Section 12(1) of the Contempt of Court Act,
1971 which prescribed a maximum fine of Rs. 5000 and om prisonment for a term
of six months shall be applicable in this case.

Zahira Habibullah Sheikh & Anr vs State Of Gujarat & Ors.

It was held in this case that the punishment that is given for contempt in the
Contempt of Court Act, 1971 shall only be applicable to the High Court but for
Supreme Court, it acts as a guide. The judgment that was given was not
accompanied by rationality, this was worrisome because the Supreme Court has
been given great powers that the drafters of the Indian
Cons tot ution has also not given.

Sudhakar Prasad vs. Govt. of A.P. and Ors.

This case is also similar to the Supreme Court Bar Association Case. In this case
also once again the Supreme Court dedared that the powers to
punish for contempt are inherent in nature and the provision of the
Const ot ution only recognised the said pre-existing situation.

The provision of the Contempt of Court cannot be used to limit the exe,rcise of
jurisdiction given in Artocle 129 and Article 215 of the Constitution.

CASE LAWS
Justice Karnan's case
He was the first sitting High Court Judge to be jailed for six months on the
accusation of Contempt of Court. In February 2017, contempt of court proceeding
was initiated against him after he accused twenty Judges of the Higher Judiciary of
Corruption. He wrote a letter to PM Modi against this but he did not provide any
evidence against them.

P.N. Duda vs V. P. Shiv Shankar & Others

In this case, the Supreme Court observed that the judges cannot use the contempt
jurisdiction for upholding their own dignot y. Our country is the free marketplace
of ideas and no one could be restricted to criticise the judicial system unless this
criticosm hampers the 'administration of justice'.
Conclusion
The existing role relating to ex facie contempt of lower courts is unsatisfactory and
misleading in India. It appears that evidently, the difficulties in this regard are the
after product of overlap of contempt powers under the Indian Penal Code,
Contempt of Courts Act and contempt powers of the Supreme Court and High
Court under the Indian constit ution. The scenario has emerged as more
complicated by way of the inconsistent interpretations followed through the
Supreme Court and High Court regarding diverse provisions under the Indian
Penal Code dealing with interference with the administration of justice and
exclusion clause contained in the Contempt of Courts Act. Not only the higher
court should be given the power to deal with contempt but also the lower court
should be given this power. Contempt of Court if seen from the perspective of the
judges, higher judicial officials seems good but if it comes to the perspective of
common people it turns towards its bad effect.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
In making this project I took the help of the following;
1.Wikipedia 2.0ld Newspaper