1|Page

A PROJECT REPORT ON CONTEMPT OF COURT- MEANING AND FEATURES

PRACTICAL TRAINING - 1

Project submitted to : PROF. VIRAL DAVE

Project submitted by : MAUNIK SANDIP PARIKH

ROLL NO: 03
DIVISION: FYLLB - B

A project submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for

The First Semester of Three Year L.L.B. Course

2022-23

To

KES’S SHRI JAYATILAL H. PATEL LAW COLLEGE

MUMBAI

Date of Submission : 25th April, 2022

 2|Page

INDEX

Sr. No. Titles Page No.

1. Introduction 03
2. Meaning of Contempt of Court 03 – 04
3. History of The Law of Contempt In India 04 – 05
4. Classification of Contempt of Court 05 – 06
5. Essential Features of Contempt of Court 06 – 07
6. Defenses available for the Civil Contempt 07
7. Punishment for Contempt of Court and Remedies against an 08
order of Punishment
8. Abuses of Effective Power of Contempt 08 – 09
9. Summary of Important Judgements addressing ‘Contempt of 09 – 10
Court
10. Conclusion 11 - 12
11. References 12
 3|Page

 Introduction:

The courts are the ultimate pedestal upon which justice is delivered and it is where inherent respect and
acquiescence should arise, but we all know that idolism is just another perspective that is confused with
reality. While it is often believed that justice served must be accepted and there must be no objection to
it but, that is often not the case. People have varied opinions and sometimes they do not agree with the
judgment delivered. Since the judge who delivered the judgment, becomes the face of the existence of
the judgment so, they are also subject to both appreciation and dissidence. Such disagreement and
dissidence often take the shape of contempt of court.

As per the Kelson theory, in every legal system exist a fundamental norm that determines the validity of
the order or rules that forms the part of the normative System of any country. This concept is known as
Grundnorm or the basic norm. In India, the Constitution is the Grundnorm, from where the entire legal
system of the country derives its validity. The Constitution is said to be supreme and the people of the
country, the organs of the government, legislature, executive, and judiciary are all bound by it.
Therefore, No one is above or beyond the Constitution but the Jurisdiction of the Contempt of Court
touches upon the Fundamental Right of Freedom of Speech and Expression and the Right to Liberty.

Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India gives the Right to Freedom of speech and Expression to all
its citizen but on the other hand Article 129 and 215 of the Constitution gives the power of contempt to
the higher judiciary which limits the freedom granted under Article 19(1) (a) and it also restricts the
Right to liberty as provided within the ambit of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Freedom of
speech and expression and the right to liberty is a sine qua non for a country between 'upholding the
majesty of the court' and protecting the non-compromisable Fundamental Right of Freedom of Speech
and Expression and Right to Liberty something which needs to be achieved.

 Meaning of Contempt of Court:

The contempt of court because of its peculiar and controversial nature has led to contradictory opinions
among the masses and this is the reason that there is no explicit definition of contempt of court. The
definition that is given by Lord Diplock in the case of Attorney General V. Times Newspapers defines
the concept of contempt of court as "a generic term descriptive of conduct in relation to particular
proceedings in a court of law which tends to undermine that system or to inhibit citizens from availing
themselves of it for the settlement of their disputes."
 4|Page

Any action or spoken or written words that impair or curtails the freedom of the court or limits the
judicial proceedings which further results in hampering of the administration of justice, constitutes
contempt of court. It is a charge against any person who is accused of interrupting the process of justice
in a court of law or any action that insults the dignity of the court or interferes with the judge's ability to
administer justice. Law is a body of rules and regulations which any country or society recognises as
binding on its citizens which is enforced by the authorities. It may attract punitive action in case of
disobedience. In case such disobedience affects the dignity of the court or causes hindrance in serving
justice then the court of justice has an inherent power to punish all persons for contempt which may
result in fines and imprisonment if the charges are proved. Thus, an act of being defiant or disrespectful
towards the court of law including its officers by opposing the authority, justice, and dignity of the court
results in contempt of the court. Such conduct or act further impairs the freedom of judicial proceedings,
hampers the administration of law, and subsequently intervenes with the due course of justice.

Contempt of Court in other words refers to a legal violation by a person who disrespects/disobeys the
Judge or tries to interrupt the flow of court. In simple words, it is a wrongful act committed by someone
which lowers/challenges/diminishes the superior authority of the Court. The act can be in the form of
failing to comply with guidelines, tampering with evidence, defying the Court, interrupting the normal
procedure of the Court, etc. It can be committed by Advocates, Officers in charge, Witnesses, or anyone
else. Article 129 and 215 empower Supreme Court and High Court respectively to punish for contempt
of themselves. Contempt of Court Act 1971 is legislation specifically dealing with the issues related to
contempt.

 History of The Law of Contempt In India:

The origins of the contempt of court lies in the pre-independence era in the 19th century. After the East
India Company took charge of India, a charter was issued by the King of England to set up corporations
in presidency towns. Initially the Mayor courts were only established in Calcutta, Madras and Bombay.
They were all covered under the ambit of the Charter of 1726. The courts in Madras and Bombay were
superseded as the recorders court and in Calcutta as the Supreme Court. The recorder courts were also
later abolished and replaced to Supreme Courts and they all shared similar powers of Contempt as
practiced by the Supreme and Recorder courts in England. These courts were then replaced by High
Courts under the Indian High Courts Act of 1861. These courts had inherent powers to initiate and
preside over contempt proceedings. Till the year 1926, the powers of Contempt were interpreted by the
courts itself in comparison to courts powers in England. However, the first statute on the subject was
introduced in the year 1926 as the Contempt of Court Act, 1926. This act defined the powers of the
courts to initiate a contempt proceeding. This act was later repealed in the year 1952 and was superseded
by the Contempt of Courts Act 1952. This act was introduced to broaden the ambit of the term “Courts”
 5|Page

in the legislation and hence it included Courts of Judicial Commissioner as well as Chief Courts. This
was the period just after independence, when the country was going through major constitutional
changes. It was observed that laws related to contempt as per the established act were vague and
ambiguous. Recognizing this issue, a bill was tabled on April 1 1960, with the objective of amending
the existing contempt laws in the country. A special committee was created after this in the year 1961
under the chairmanship of Shri H.N. Sanyal. He was the Assistant solicitor general of India. The
committee, after analysing the act, submitted its suggestions and recommendations in 1963. The report
was universally accepted by the government and it was later sent to the Join Select committee for
ratification. They suggested certain changes including introducing the idea of limitation period on
initiation of contempt proceedings. Finally in the year 1971, the government introduced the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971.

 Classification of Contempt of Court:

The act divided the concept of Contempt into two sections:
- Civil Contempt
- Criminal Contempt

(A) Civil Contempt:

Section 2(b) of Contempt of Court Act 1971 defines Civil Contempt. According to it, “Civil
contempt means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other
process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court.” The level of seriousness
is quite less in comparison to criminal contempt. Mens rea forms an important component in
Civil Contempt. The plain reading of the definition suggests that civil contempt is a wrong
committed against those who were supposed to get benefit from proceedings. Willful
disobedience of a Court’s order is considered Civil Contempt of a Court. Supreme Court in
Ashok Paper Kamgar Union and Ors. v. Dharam Godha and Ors defined the word “wilful”,
according to it, “'Wilful' means an act or omission which is done voluntarily and intentionally
and with the specific intent to do something the law forbids or with the specific intent to fail to
do something the law requires to be done, that is to say with bad purpose either to disobey or to
disregard the law. It signifies a deliberate action done with evil intent or with a bad motive or
purpose.” The court further said, “to constitute contempt the order of the Court must be of such a
nature which is capable of execution by the person charged in normal circumstances. It should
not require any extraordinary effort nor should be dependent, either wholly or in part, upon any
act or omission of a third party for its compliance.” There are some defences available for Civil
contempt of Court. The most commonly used is a Lack of knowledge as the person is not aware
of the orders then he/she cannot be made liable for not complying with those orders. As
 6|Page

mentioned earlier, Mens Rea forms an important part of Section 2(b). If the act did was done
unintentionally then it too forms a good defence. Similarly, some other defences too i.e. the
order was vague, the order was impossible to be performed by ordinary circumstances, etc.

(B) Criminal Contempt:

Section 2(c) of Contempt of Court Act 1971 describes Criminal Contempt. According to it,
“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 other act
whatsoever which-
(i) scandalizes or tends to scandalize, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court;
or
(ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial
proceeding; or
(iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of
justice in any other manner;”

To constitute an act as a Criminal Contempt four essentials must be fulfilled i.e. Publication of
any matter, Lowering or Undermining the authority of a Court, interfering with the normal
Judicial proceedings, and interfering with the administration of Justice. Preventing Preceding
Officers of the Court, Litigating parties, Policemen, or anyone associated with proceedings of a
Court from approaching court amounts to Criminal Contempt as it is a clear interference in the
administration of Justice. The law of contempt is based on sound public policy by punishing any
conduct which shakes the public confidence in the administration of justice. Criminal Contempt
are generally severe in comparison to civil contempt. There are very few instances in which a
mere apology was accepted and the punishment was set aside.

 Essential Features of Contempt of Court:

To prove an offence in the court, it is very necessary to fulfil the essentials of it first. Every offence
in India has certain exceptions that have to be fulfilled for making the person liable for doing the
act. To understand the requirement of fulfilling the essentials, let us go through with an example, if
a person named Surya has to prove that the other person named Samiksha is the guilt of committing
an act which is unlawful and an offence in the court of law. Then the liability to prove Samkisha
guilty relies on Surya, which includes fulfilling the essential required to commit that act or not.
Similarly, the contempt of court also has certain essentials that are as follows:
 7|Page

1. Act of disobedience to any type of court proceedings, its orders, decree, judgment, etc. should be
done ‘willfully and purposely’ in case of Civil Contempt.

2. Talking about criminal contempt, “publication” is one of the major things and this publication
can be either in the form of spoken or written, or by words, or by signs, or by visible
representation.
3. The action of the doer should be deliberate, and it should also be clearly disregard of the court’s
order.
4. The court should in its best capacity, always try to make a “valid order” and this order should be
in knowledge of the respondent.

 Defenses available for the Civil Contempt:

The following defences are available to a person who is accused of civil contempt:

1. A person cannot be held liable for contempt of court if he is not aware of the order given by the
court or claims that he didn't have any knowledge of the order. The party of the court is duty-
bound by the court that the order passed should be served to the individual by the post or
personally or through the certified copy. The accused person can successfully plead that the
certified copy was not formally served to him.
2. If the accused of civil contempt pleads that the act done by him was not done willfuly and it was
just a mere accident or beyond their control then it can be treated as defense if it is reasonable
otherwise such plea is discarded.
3. If the order passed by the court is vague or ambiguous or if the order is not Specific or complete
then it can be used as a defense by the person accused of civil contempt if the order is disobeyed.
In R.N. Ramaul v. State of Himachal Pradesh, this defense was taken by the respondent. In this
case, the Supreme Court has directed the respondent to restore the promotion of the petitioner. A
complaint was filed against the respondent for the contempt of court on the failure to provide the
monetary benefit for the given period. He pleads for the defense on the given evidence that the
order by the court did not mention to pay monetary benefit and the defense was granted by th e
court.
4. If the order involves more than one reasonable and rational interpretation and the respondent
adopts one of the interpretations and works in accordance with that then he will not be liable for
the civil contempt.
5. If the compliance of the order is impossible and it cannot be done easily then it can be treated as
a defense for the civil contempt if it is due to. impossibility and not difficulties. The defense can
be given only in the case of impossibility in complying with the order.
 8|Page

 Punishment for Contempt of Court and Remedies against an order of Punishment:

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 apology shall
not be rejected on the ground that it is conditional or qualified. The court cannot 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 it.

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 punished 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 public interest and the request for invoking that defence
is bona fide.

 Abuses of Effective Power of Contempt:

Is the judiciary's action justified in mutilating the freedom of speech and expression for
maintaining the independence of the court? Can the effective power of contempt provided by the
virtue of the Indian Constitution be exercised as the medium of suppression rather than upholding
the dignity of the court so that the faith of the people in the judiciary does not waver?
 9|Page

In a democratic setup in any country, it is the people who are supreme and the state and other
authorities including the judiciary are there to assist in the smooth functioning of the country. The
authorities are not supposed to misuse their power and boast about their supremacy. The judges
should not use this legislation to protect their dignity but to protect the dignity of the court and its
administration But the problem arises when the balance is not maintained between the Right to
freedom of Speech and Expression and the power provided to the High Court and Supreme Court
under Article 129 and 215. As discussed earlier in the Mid-Day Newspaper case the severe
punishment of four months for the act or contempt for a caricature of a former Chief Justice of
India is a gross misuse of power and a threat to Article 19.

Arundhati Roy has faced contempt charges three times wherein one instance she was charged with
contempt of the court for criticizing the judgment given in the Sardar Sarovar dam case as it did
not go down well with the judges of the Supreme Court. Again it was more of a suppression of the
Right to Freedom of Speech and expression rather than a case of contempt.

In Attorney General v. British Broadcasting Corporation, Lord Salmond observed that "the
description contempt of court no doubt has a historical basis, but it is nevertheless misleading. Its
object is not to protect the dignity of the court, but to protect administration of justice."

In Bal Krishan Giri v. the State of U.P., the Supreme Court upheld the order of the Allahabad
High Court where the lawyer's apology was rejected and imprisoned for a month as he had
levelled certain allegation against the judge. The court justified its contempt power by stating that
it was crucial to "'secure public respect and confidence in the judicial process.”

Now the question is, 'Is there any consistency and certainty in this law'? In today's time, the power
of contempt is used discriminately which often yields counter and adverse effects. It must not be
forgotten that in a democracy the people are supreme, and they must have the right to criticize
judges and the judges must not be oversensitive. Their shoulder must be broad enough to brush
aside mendacious criticism rather than being agitated by it.

 Summary of Important Judgements addressing ‘Contempt of Court’:

1. 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 applicable in the Supreme Court and the High Court. This means that Section 12(1) of
 10 | P a g e

the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 which prescribed a maximum fine of Rs. 5000 and
imprisonment for a term of six months shall be applicable in this case.

2. 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 Constitution has also not given.

3. 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 declared that the powers
to punish for contempt are inherent in nature and the provision of the Constitution only
recognised the said pre-existing situation. The provision of the Contempt of Court cannot be
used to limit the exercise of jurisdiction given in Article 129 and Article 215 of the Constitution.

4. 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 dignity. Our country is
the free marketplace of ideas and no one could be restricted to criticise the judicial system
unless this criticism hampers the ‘administration of justice.

5. Indirect Tax practitioners’ Association v. R.K. Jain: In this case, the Supreme court
observed that the defence of truth can be permitted to the person accused of contempt if the two
conditions are satisfied. These are: (i) if it is in the interest of public and (ii) the request for
invoking the said defence is bonafide. These are given in Section 13 of the Contempt of Court
Act, 1971.

6. 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.

7. Ashok Paper Kamgar Union and Ors. v. Dharam Godha And Ors .: In this case, the
Supreme Court examined the provision of Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971
which defines the term civil contempt. It signifies a deliberate action with bad intentions or bad
motives. Therefore, to constitute contempt, it must be of such a nature that is capable of
execution by the person charged in normal circumstances. It should not require any
 11 | P a g e

extraordinary effort. And this has to be judged regarding the facts and circumstances of each
case.

 Conclusion:
The main purpose of the contempt law is to empower the judiciary and to make sure that they are
working efficiently. It is not to be used for the purpose of protecting the Individual judge's dignity.
The people of India have immense faith in the and if the judiciary dignity of the court is not
protected then their faith will waver. And if their faith is shaken then it will have its repercussion on
the entire judicial system or country. So, it is important that the respect and the dignity of the
judicial system are maintained. The Contempt of Court Act, 1971 has many shortcomings that
needs to be overcome. The judiciary must use the jurisdiction of contempt in manner. The court
must appreciate fair criticism. There must be a distinction be added in the Contempt of Court Act,
1971. Words like 'lowering the authority of the court and scandalising the court' must be omitted
from the Act as they lead arbitrariness of the judge. Freedom of the press is crucial for democracy
so it the not be suppressed. There must be no discrimination or partiality with the application of this
jurisdiction.
With authority comes responsibility. Hence, judicial officers must make use of the contempt power
cautiously and must not misuse it.

The best ammunition for any judge is his integrity, virtue, and learning. If this fundamental rule is
practiced, then the judges can do without the power of contempt. A Judge must not be over
sensitive or agitated by the criticism made against him. Tolerance to criticism is a sign of maturity
so he must not recent criticism. Lord Denning had said that he would never use the contempt
jurisdiction to uphold his own dignity for "that must rest on surer foundations". In words that bear
repetition, caid: We do not fear criticism, nor do we resent it. For there is something far more
important at stake. It is no less than freedom of speech itself.”

The contempt of the court Act 1971 is still very ambiguous and to a certain extent, it is
unsatisfactory and misleading. To maintain the balance between the freedom of speech and
expression is something that still needs to be achieve. This statute has also given the constitutional
court the wider power to restrict the Right to Liberty which is a Fundamental Right under Article
21. The judgment given in the case of Mid-Day newspaper has again put a question mark on the
neutrality of the judiciary and the helplessness of the defendant.
 12 | P a g e

In a democracy, the purpose of the contempt power should be limited, and the time has arrived for
making certain amendments in contempt jurisdiction. The contempt power in a democracy is for
ensuring that the court is functioning effectively not to protect the self-esteem of an individual
judge. As quoted by Chief Justice Marshall of the US Supreme Court, "Power of judiciary lies not
in deciding cases, nor in imposing sentences, nor in punishing för contempt, but in the trust,
confidence, and faith in the common man."
In every civil society, access to Justice forms an important part. Courts are primarily responsible for
administering Justice in a State. Interrupting Court’s Proceedings or trying to degrade its value not
only affects the Court’s reputation but also has a deep impact on access to justice. The concept of
Contempt of Court plays a very important role in the proper mechanism of Court. However, the
provisions of contempt mustn't be misused. If misused it will act like an illegitimate restriction on
Various Fundamental Rights i.e. Freedom of Speech and Expression.

 References:
1. Mridushi Swarup, "Kelson's Theory of Grundnorm", Manupatra, available at ntp://www.
manupatra.com/roundup/330/Articles/Article%201.pdf.
2. The Constitution of India, arts. 19, 129, 215, 21.
3. Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
4. Diganth Raj Sehgal, "Contempt of Court” iPleaders, 20 th August, 2019 available at ps://blog.
ipleaders.in/contempt-of-court-2/
5. Merriam-Webster https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/contempt.
6. Utpal Kumar Das v. Court of the Munsiff, Kamrup, MANU.GH/0519/2007
7. Ashok Paper Kamgar Union and Ors. V. Dharam Godha And Ors, MANU/SC/0679/2003
8. J. R. Parashar, Advocate & Ors vs Prasant Bhushan, Advocate & Ors, MANU/SC/0493/2001
9. Mohd. Iqbal Khanday vs Abdul Majid Rather, MANU/SC/0467/1994
10. Supreme court oberver, https://www.scobserver.in/the-desk/locating-court-s-contempt-power.
11. Rachita Taneja contempt case: Criticism of courts growing, everyone doing it, says Supreme
court.