Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MEANING OF CONTEMPT
Contempt is an act of deliberate disobedience or disregard for the laws, regulations, or decorum
of a public authority, such as a court or legislative body. In legal terminology, contempt refers to
any willful disobedience to, or disregard of, a court order or any misconduct in the presence of a
court; action that interferes with a judge's ability to administer justice or that insults the dignity
of the court.1 There are essentially two types of contempt:
a) Contempt in facie disrespect to the decorum of the court (being rude, disrespectful to the
judge or other attorneys or causing a disturbance in the courtroom, particularly after
being warned by the judge)
b) Contempt ex facie willful failure to obey an order of the court. Failure to make a courtordered payment, such as alimony, may result in a finding of contempt. The court's power
to punish for contempt includes fines and/or jail time. Since the judge has discretion to
control the courtroom, contempt citations are generally not appealable unless the amount
of fine or jail time is excessive.
"Justice is not a cloistered virtue, She must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful, even
if outspoken, comments of ordinary men."
-Helmore, Justive Bowen
In Austman and Oddson v Bjarnason, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal adopted these words:
"A contempt is a disobedience to the Court, an opposing or despising the authority, justice, or
dignity
thereof.
"It commonly consists in a party's doing otherwise than he is enjoined to do, or not doing what
he is commanded or required by the process, order or decree of the Court.
"There were three kinds of contempt: (1) Scandalizing the Court itself; (2) Abusing parties who
are concerned in causes in the Court; (3) Prejudicing mankind against persons before the cause is
heard....
1 Miller C.J., Contempt of Court, 2nd edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989, p. 34.
1
judicial capacity. Mr, C.K. Daphtary, along with others, filed a petition alleging that the booklet
has scandalised the judges who participated in the decision and brought into contempt the
authority of the highest court of the land and thus weakened the confidence of the people in it.
The Supreme Court, in examining the scope of the contempt of court, laid down that the test in
each case is whether the impugned publication is a mere defamatory attack on the judge or
whether it will interfere with the due course of justice or the proper administration of law by the
court.
Court had the same powers for punishing for contempt as the superior courts of England .The
Supreme Courts were in turn succeeded by the High Courts under the High Courts Act of 1861.
The High Court of Calcutta was a court of record in all its jurisdictions and therefore possessed
power to commit for contempt6. In 1886, the High Court of Allahabad was established under the
High Courts Act, 1861 and was constituted as a Court of Record.
The Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court considered this jurisdiction of the High Court in
1879 in Martin v. Lawrence7. Mr. Justice White observed:
The jurisdiction of the court, under which this process of contempt issued is a jurisdiction that
it has inherited from the old Supreme Court and was conferred upon that court by the Charters of
the authority of the then court of Kings Bench and the High Court of Chancery in Great Britain,
and this jurisdiction has not been removed or affected by the Civil Procedure Code.
The inherent powers of the High Courts to punish for contempt were later affirmed by Lahore 8
and Patna High Court9. Privy Council also accepted the same view in Ambard v. Attorney
General, Trinidad and Tabago.10 These decisions show that the power to punish summarily for
contempt is not created by statute but inherent in every court of record.
Prior to the passing of the Contempt of Courts Act 1926 there was a conflict of opinion among
the different High Court as to their power to commit for contempt of subordinate court. Madras 11
and Bombay12 High Court expressed the view that the High Courts could have jurisdiction to
deal with contempt of the Mofussil Courts. But the Calcutta 13 High Court expressed the view that
the High Court in India did not possess identical power in matters of contempt of their
6 Re Abdool and Mehtaf (1867) 8 W.R. (Cr.) 32.
7 I.L.R. 4 Cal. 444 (1879).
8 In the Matter of Muslim Outlook, AIR 1927 Lah. 610.
9 Emperor v. Murali Manohar Prasad, AIR 1929 Pat 72.
10 AIR 1936 P.C. 141
11In the Matter of K.Venkta Rao, 121, C. 239 (1921)
12 Re Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, AIR 1920 Bom. 175.
4
subordinate courts as possessed by the Court of Kings Bench in England. In 1926, the Full
Bench of the Allahabad High Court dealt with contempt of subordinate court under its inherent
powers as a court of record.
For making the concept of contempt more specific and for providing punishment for contempt of
subordinate courts, the first Indian statute on the law of contempt i.e., the Contempt of Courts
Act was passed in 1926. It was enacted to define and limit the powers of certain courts in
punishing contempt of courts. When the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 (XII of 1926) was in
existence in British India, various Indian States also had their corresponding enactment. These
States were Hyderabad, Madhya Bharat, Mysore, Pepsu, Rajasthan, Travancore-Cochin and
Saurashtra. Section 2 of the Act, 1926, empowered the High Courts of judicature to exercise the
jurisdiction, power and authority to punish contempt of subordinate court. The Act was amended
in 1937 to make it clear that the limits of punishment provided in the Act related not only to
contempt of subordinate court but also to all cases.
Articles 12914 and 21515 of the Constitution of India made the Supreme Court and High Courts
respectively as Court of Record. Article 225, permits the High Courts to continue the jurisdiction
and powers which they possessed immediately before the commencement of the Constitution.
Though the High Court as a Court of Record had the power to punish contempt of itself, doubt
arose as to the power of the Court of Record to punish contempt of subordinate courts.
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 did not contain any provision with regard to contempt of
courts subordinate to Chief Courts and Judicial Commissioners Court and also extra territorial
jurisdiction of High Courts in matters of contempt. So, the State enactments of the Indian States
and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 were replaced by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 (32 of
1952). Section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 conferred the power on the High Courts
including that of the Judicial Commissioners Court to punish contempt of subordinate court.
Section 4 of the Act limited the punishment to be awarded in case of contempt.
The Contempt of Courts Act 1952 though sound so far as it goes touches only the fringes of the
subject. While its existing provisions should be continued there is need for widening
considerably the scope of the Act.16 The unsatisfactory nature of the Contempt of Courts Act,
1952 necessitated the government to constitute a Committee to study the matter for the proper
functioning of the law of contempt.
An attempt was made in April, 1960 to introduce in the Lok Sabha a Bill to consolidate and
amend the law relating to Contempt of Courts. On an examination of the Bill, Government
appears to have felt that the law relating to contempt of courts in uncertain, undefined and
unsatisfactory and that in the light of the Constitutional changes which have taken place in the
country, it would be advisable to have the entire law on the subject scrutinized by a Special
Committee set up for the purpose In pursuance of that decision, a Committee was set up on July
29, 1961 under the Chairmanship of the late H N Sanyal, the then Additional Solicitor General.
The Committee made a comprehensive examination of the law and problems relating to
contempt of court in the light of the position obtaining in our own Country and various foreign
Countries. The recommendations, which the Committee made, took note of the importance given
to freedom of speech in the Constitution and of the need for safeguarding the status and dignity
of courts and interests of administration of justice.
The Sanyal Committee submitted its report on February 28, 1963 to define and limit the powers
of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts and to regulate their procedure in relation
thereto. The recommendations of the Committee have been generally accepted by the
government after considering the view expressed on those recommendations by the State
Governments, Union Territory Administrations, the Supreme Court, the High Courts and the
Judicial Commissioners. The Joint Select Committee of Parliament on Contempt of Courts
examined the issue in detail and the Committee prepared a new Bill, the Contempt of courts Bill,
1968. The Bill seeks to give effect to the accepted recommendations of the Sanyal Committee.
The recommendations of the Committee have been generally accepted by Government after
considering the view expressed on those recommendations by the State Governments, Union
Territory Administrations, the Supreme Court, the High Courts and the Judicial Commissioners.
16 Report of the Committee on Contempt of Court, 9 (1963).
6
LAW POINT
For the concept of Contempt of Court, the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 was passed which dealt
with such a concept. Article 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India empowers the Supreme
Court and High Court respectively to punish people for their respective contempt. Section 10 of
The Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 defines the power of the High Court to punish contempt of
its subordinate courts. Power to punish for contempt of court under Articles 129 and 215 is not
subject to Article 19(1)(a).
Contempt of Court position under Indian Constitution are as following Art. 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.
Art.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.
Art.144:Civil and judicial authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court.All
authorities, civil and judicial, in the territory of India shall act in aid of the Supreme
Court.
Art.141. Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts. The law declared
by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.
Art.142. Enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court and orders as to discovery,
etc. (1) The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or
make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter
17 It came into force w.e.f. December 24, 1971 (70 of 1971).
7
pending before it, and any decree so passed or order so made shall be enforceable
throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any
law made by Parliament and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as
the President may by order prescribe.
Art.261. (1) Full faith and credit shall be given throughout the territory of India to public
acts, records and judicial proceedings of the Union and of every State.
the justice-delivery system of our country. The law of contempt provides the necessary tool to
the courts to check unwarranted attacks or efforts at undermining the Rule of Law.
ESSENTIALS
The elements generally needed to establish contempt are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
TYPES
According to Lord Hardwick, there is a three-fold classification of Contempt:
1. Scandalizing the court itself.
2. Abusing parties who are concerned in the cause, in the presence of court.
3. Prejudicing the public before the cause is heard.
Under Indian law, contempt of court has been divided into two categories:
I.
II.
Civil contempt
Criminal contempt
Civil contempt means - willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ, or
other process of a Court, or willful breach of an undertaking given to a Court (section 2.b). A
civil contempt is a failure to obey the courts order issued for the benefit of the opposing party.
Criminal contempt means - The publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs,
or by visible representations or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any act whatsoever,
which :
I.
II.
scandalizes or tends to scandalize or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court;
prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial
III.
proceeding; or
Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of
justice in any other matter (section 2.c).
A criminal contempt is conduct that is directed against the dignity and authority of the court.
There is not much of a problem with regard to civil contempt, inasmuch as it is essentially a
willful disobedience of the order of a court. However, in the case of criminal contempt, there has
always been uncertainty with regard to scandalising the court. Very often the courts have not
been able to distinguish between the scandalising of a judge, and the scandalising of the court.
Broadly, these are the two categories of contempt. It has always been held that the Supreme
Court and the High Courts have inherent powers to punish anyone for contempt, for the purpose
of safeguarding the dignity of the court (articles 129 & 215 of the Constitution of India).
Under Indian law, the following are not contempt:
Innocent publication and distribution of any matter by words, spoken or written, or by signs
or visible representations, which may interfere, or tend to interfere with the administration
of justice (section 3);
Fair and accurate reporting of judicial proceedings (section 4);
Fair criticism of a judicial act or any proceedings (section 5); and,
A complaint against the presiding officers of subordinate courts, made in good faith
(section 6).
There is a right of appeal from any order or decision of the High Court in the exercise of its
jurisdiction to punish for contempt. If the order is of a single judge, the appeal is to a bench of
not less than two judges. If the order is that of a bench, the appeal is to the Supreme Court
(section 19).
In the case of criminal contempt, there are certain additional requirements. The cognizance of
criminal contempt can only be taken on the motion made by the Advocate-General or by any
other person with the consent in writing of the Advocate-General (section 15). If the court is
satisfied it shall frame a charge, and thereafter the case proceeds like a criminal trial.
THIRD PARTY
A third party to the proceeding may be guilty of contempt of court if they have a part to play in
the offence. In LED Builders Pty Ltd v Eagles Homes Pty Ltd ([1999] FCA 1213) Lindgren J
stated: "It is not necessary to show that a person who has aided and abetted a contempt of court
was served with the order breached. It is necessary to show only that the person sought to be
made liable knew of the order."
LIMITATION
The Limitation period for actions of contempt has been discussed under Section 20 of the
Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 and is a period of one year from the date on which the contempt
is alleged to have been committed.
PUNISHMENT
Power of High Court to try offences committed or offenders found outside jurisdiction
(Sec.11)
Punishment for contempt of court :
(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law, a contempt of
court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six
11
months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both. :
Provided that the accused may be discharged or the punishment awarded may be remitted
on apology being made to the satisfaction of the court.
Explanation.-An apology shall not be rejected merely on the ground that it is qualified or
conditional if the accused makes it bona fide. [Sec.12]
APPEALS
An appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of High Court in the exercise of its
jurisdiction to punish for contemptA. where the order or decision is that of a single Judge, to a Bench of not less than two
Judges of the Court ;
B. where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court : [Sec. 19]
12
CONCLUSION
The Supreme Court is vested with the right to punish those guilty of contempt of Court under
Article 129 read with Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The power to punish contemprers
is also vested with the High Courts under Article 215 of the Constitution and the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971 also governs the punishments given by the High Court.
The contempt power in a democracy is only to enable the court to function effectively, and not to
protect the self-esteem of an individual judge. The foundation of judiciary is based on the trust
and the confidence of the people in its ability to deliver fearless and impartial justice. When the
foundation itself is shaken by acts which tend to create disaffection and disrespect for the
authority of the court by disrupting its working, the edifice of the judicial system gets eroded.
Judiciary by punishing the guilty infuses faith in the supremacy of law and omnipotence of
justice. Every offender is to be punished for contumacious acts under the relevant contempt laws,
but it is extremely important to make it sure by the judiciary that these provisions are not to be
misused.
It can be adequately inferred that the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is of paramount importance
in the context of sustaining the concept of justice. It aides to make the process of administering
justice expeditious as well as upholds the dignity and faith the people have bestowed in the
judicial system of the country. In itself, it abstains from any form of arbitrariness. It gives every
organization or individual charged under the act reasonable grounds to defend it or himself, as
the case may be. The restrictions, it imposes, is just and fair in them. Moreover, it recognizes the
equal footing of all people in the country by bringing the judiciary and its officials within its
ambit.
In the Supreme Court Bar Association case the court took a very objective view and taking the
help of law and construing it in the right way came to the conclusion that the power to punish for
any professional misconduct rests with the Bar, whereas to punish for contempt only it has
jurisdiction for itself and subordinate courts. No statute can take contempt jurisdiction away from
the Supreme as well as the High Court.
15
BIBLIOGRAPHY
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/3570/10/10_chapter%202.pdf
http://law.dewaninstitutes.org/contempt-court.pdf
http://www.hrdiap.gov.in/88fc/Week-12/Contempt%20of%20Courts%20in%20India.pdf
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Contempt+of+Court
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c118.htm
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/ContemptofCourt.aspx
16