CLINICAL LEGAL COURSE

Topic: A Critical Analysis on Contempt of Court

ATIF KHAN
2021-342-021

Submitted to- Adv. Lavanya Pathak

 Acknowledgement
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all those who have supported me throughout the
course of this research project.
First and foremost, I would like to thank my professor, Adv. Lavanya Pathak, for their
invaluable guidance, constant support, and constructive feedback. Their expertise and
encouragement have been instrumental in the completion of this paper.
I also wish to extend my heartfelt thanks to other faculty members, research assistants, or mentors
for their insightful advice and assistance during the research process.
A special thanks to my family and friends for their unwavering support, understanding, and
encouragement. Their belief in me has been a source of motivation throughout this journey.
Lastly, I would like to acknowledge all the participants, libraries, and resources that contributed
to this study. Without their cooperation and access to essential materials, this research would not
have been possible.

Thank You All.

1. Louis Dembitz Brandeis was an American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to
1939.
2. K. Balasankaran Nair, LAW OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN INDIA, (v) (2004).
3. AG v. Leveller Magazine Ltd. [1979] AC 440, p. 449s
4. Lord Diplock in Attorney General v. Times News Paper Ltd. (1973) 3 All. E.R. 54, 71.
5. Article 129: 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.
6. Article 215: 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.
7. Justice Markandey Katju, It’s time to amend law on contempt of court, The Times of India, July 29, 2014.
10. Act 6 of Contempt of Court amendment act 2006.
11. State of U.P. v. Das Vidhi 1973 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1271.
12. S.C. Tyagi v. N.C. Gupta 1974 Cri. L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 428.
13. State of U.P. v. Narendra Pal Singh 1990 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1637 .
INTRODUCTION:

If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.

- Louis D. Brandeis
Law in India has evolved from various customary practices and religious prescription to the present
constitutional and legal system of our society. Law as a subject of customary practice and religious
prescriptions has an astral history in Indian society. It has its sources in the Vedas, the Upanishads
and other religious scripts. It is a fertile field ameliorated by practitioners from different Hindu
philosophical schools, followed by Jains and Buddhists. The term law is defined as rules of human
conduct that emanates from a source recognized as competent by the legal order and which
prescribes the imposition of a sanction in the event of disobedience. For a layman law can be
defined as a system of rules and regulations which any country or society recognizes as binding
on its citizens, which the authorities may enforce, and if violated attracts punitive action.
The term law is defined as rules of human conduct that emanates from a source recognized as
competent by the legal order and which prescribes the imposition of a sanction in the event of
disobedience. For a layman law can be defined as a system of rules and regulations which any
country or society recognizes as binding on its citizens, which the authorities may enforce, and if
violated attracts punitive action.

CONTEMPT OF COURT:
Contempt of court is a matter concerning the fair administration of justice, and aims to punish any
act hurting the dignity and authority of judicial tribunals. Lord Dip lock defines it in a following
way: Although criminal contempt of court may take a variety of forms they all share a common
characteristic: they involve an interference with the due administration of justice, either in a
particular case or more generally as a continuing process. It is justice itself that is flouted by
contempt of court, not the individual court or judge who is attempting to administer it. Contempt
of court because of its peculiar and contentious nature had led to contradictory opinions among
scholars, jurists and various masses, hence no satisfactory definition of contempt of court can be
had. The term contempt of court is a generic term descriptive of conduct in relation to particular
proceedings in a court of law which tends to undermine that system or inhibit citizens from availing
themselves of it for the settlement of their disputes.
Our Constitution has granted the Supreme Court and the High Court with the power to punish any
person for contempt of court under Articles 129 and 215 respectively.
1. Louis Dembitz Brandeis was an American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to
1939.
2. K. Balasankaran Nair, LAW OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN INDIA, (v) (2004).
3. AG v. Leveller Magazine Ltd. [1979] AC 440, p. 449s
4. Lord Diplock in Attorney General v. Times News Paper Ltd. (1973) 3 All. E.R. 54, 71.
5. Article 129: 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.
6. Article 215: 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.
7. Justice Markandey Katju, It’s time to amend law on contempt of court, The Times of India, July 29, 2014.
10. Act 6 of Contempt of Court amendment act 2006.
11. State of U.P. v. Das Vidhi 1973 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1271.
12. S.C. Tyagi v. N.C. Gupta 1974 Cri. L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 428.
13. State of U.P. v. Narendra Pal Singh 1990 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1637 .
GENESIS OF CONTEMPT LAW:
The term contempt of court (Contemptus curiae) has been in use since centuries and is as historic
as law. The law concerning to contempt of court has advanced over the centuries as a medium
whereby the courts may act to forbid or punish conduct which tends to obstruct, humiliate or
prejudice the administration of justice either with reference to a particular case or as in general. In
ancient times king was regarded as the fountain of justice and he used to hear the cases himself.
The king’s authority was absolute, and the people were his subjects. They could not condemn him
and criticism, if made was punishable. With time, due to increase in burden of work he had to
delegate the function to a body created by him, i.e. judges.
The idea of contempt of the king is referred to as an offence in the laws set-forth in the first half
of the twelfth century. Contempt of the king’s writ was mentioned in the laws of king Henry. In
the same laws there was mention of pecuniary penalty for contempt or disregard of orders. Thus,
in England before the end of the twelfth century contempt of court was a recognized expression
and applied to the defaults and wrongful acts of suitors.
The law of contempt of court in India has its origin in British administration in India. This
originated from an undelivered judgment of J Wilmot in 1765, where the judge said the power of
contempt of court was necessary to maintain the dignity and majesty of judges and vindicate their
authority. Privy Council in Surendranath Banerjee’s case observed that: “…a high court derives
its power to punish for contempt from its own existence or creations. It is not a power, conferred
upon it by law.” In 1926, the Contempt of Court Act was passed to bring transparency in the
concept of contempt of court and to punish for the contempt of subordinate courts.
This Act was replaced by Contempt of Court Act, 1952 since it did not had any provision
regarding contempt of courts lower to Chief Courts and Judicial Commissioner’s court. But the
Act of 1952 was again replaced by Contempt of Court Act, 1971 on the recommendations of the
committee headed by H.N. Sanyal. This was done due to the dissatisfactory, uncertain and
undefined nature of Contempt of Court Act, 1952. In a very pragmatic way and in an effort to
beatify the idea of justice, The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed to punish those who, in
any way, hinder in the path of the judiciary to deliver justice to the people. In a sound judiciary
everyone is entitled to a free and fair trial without any discrimination whatsoever. Hence, any
action which is detrimental to the judicial idea of justice is desired to be punished under the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

1. Louis Dembitz Brandeis was an American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to
1939.
2. K. Balasankaran Nair, LAW OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN INDIA, (v) (2004).
3. AG v. Leveller Magazine Ltd. [1979] AC 440, p. 449s
4. Lord Diplock in Attorney General v. Times News Paper Ltd. (1973) 3 All. E.R. 54, 71.
5. Article 129: 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.
6. Article 215: 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.
7. Justice Markandey Katju, It’s time to amend law on contempt of court, The Times of India, July 29, 2014.
10. Act 6 of Contempt of Court amendment act 2006.
11. State of U.P. v. Das Vidhi 1973 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1271.
12. S.C. Tyagi v. N.C. Gupta 1974 Cri. L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 428.
13. State of U.P. v. Narendra Pal Singh 1990 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1637 .
CONTEMPT OF COURT CLASSIFIED:
The Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 divides the expression ‘contempt of court’ into two categories
of contempt, viz.,

(i) Civil contempt and

(ii)Criminal contempt.

Civil Contempt:
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. Under Section 2(b) of The
Contempt of Court Act, 1971 'civil contempt', is defined to mean wilful disobedience to any
judgment, decree, order, direction or any other process of court or wilful breach of an undertaking
given to the court.
It can basically be held to be any wrong to the person who is entitled to the benefit of a court order.
It is a wrong for which the law awards indemnification to the injured party; though formally it is
contempt of court in fact it is a wrong of private nature. Civil contempt is a sanction to enforce
deference with an order.

Criminal contempt:
It is very serious type of act. Handcuffing, arrest and assault of a Judicial Officer by Police
Officers amount to criminal contempt. If any judicial officer is led into trap by unethical police
officers and is allowed to be assaulted, handcuffed and roped, people will bound to lose faith in
courts, which would be destructive of basic structure of any democratically organized society. If
this is permitted rule of law shall be supplemented by police raj, viewed in this perspective any
such incident shall not be a case of physical assault on an individual judicial officer instead it shall
be an onslaught on the institution of the judiciary itself. Hence it can be clarified that 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 —

1. Louis Dembitz Brandeis was an American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to
1939.
2. K. Balasankaran Nair, LAW OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN INDIA, (v) (2004).
3. AG v. Leveller Magazine Ltd. [1979] AC 440, p. 449s
4. Lord Diplock in Attorney General v. Times News Paper Ltd. (1973) 3 All. E.R. 54, 71.
5. Article 129: 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.
6. Article 215: 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.
7. Justice Markandey Katju, It’s time to amend law on contempt of court, The Times of India, July 29, 2014.
10. Act 6 of Contempt of Court amendment act 2006.
11. State of U.P. v. Das Vidhi 1973 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1271.
12. S.C. Tyagi v. N.C. Gupta 1974 Cri. L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 428.
13. State of U.P. v. Narendra Pal Singh 1990 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1637 .
• Scandalizes or tends to scandalize, or lowers or tends to lower, the authority of any court;
or  Prejudices or interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any Judicial proceeding;
or

• Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct the administration of

Justice in any other manner.

The difference between the two types of above cases is that of procedure which was clearly held
by the Allahabad High Court in Vijay Pratap Singh v. Ajit Prasad, it was held that a distinction
between a civil contempt and criminal contempt seems to be that , in a civil contempt the purpose
is to force the contemnor to do something for the benefits of the other party, while in criminal
contempt the proceeding is by way of punishment for a wrong not so much to a party or individual
but to the public at large by interfering with the normal process of law degrading the majesty of
the court. However, if a civil contempt is enforced by fine or imprisonment of the contemnor for
non-performance of his obligation imposed by a court, it turns out into a criminal contempt and
becomes a criminal matter at the end. Such contempt, being neither purely civil nor purely criminal
in nature, is sometimes called sui generis. It is submitted that the differentiating line between civil
and criminal contempt is sometimes very thin and might often considered being same. Where the
contempt consists in mere failure to comply with or carry on an order of a court made for the
benefit of a private party, it is plainly civil contempt. If, however, the contemnor adds defiance of
the court to disobedience of the order and conducts himself in a manner which amounts to
abstraction or interference with the courts of justice, the contempt committed by him is of a mixed
character, partaking of between him and his opponent the nature of a civil contempt.
Contempt jurisdiction of the judiciary has to be used to maintain the dignity of the judiciary and
also to safeguard the proceedings of the court from external interference. Thus, by classifying the
power of contempt into two distinct categories the legislature till certain extent has been able to
limit the scope of the contempt jurisdiction.

1. Louis Dembitz Brandeis was an American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to
1939.
2. K. Balasankaran Nair, LAW OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN INDIA, (v) (2004).
3. AG v. Leveller Magazine Ltd. [1979] AC 440, p. 449s
4. Lord Diplock in Attorney General v. Times News Paper Ltd. (1973) 3 All. E.R. 54, 71.
5. Article 129: 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.
6. Article 215: 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.
7. Justice Markandey Katju, It’s time to amend law on contempt of court, The Times of India, July 29, 2014.
10. Act 6 of Contempt of Court amendment act 2006.
11. State of U.P. v. Das Vidhi 1973 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1271.
12. S.C. Tyagi v. N.C. Gupta 1974 Cri. L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 428.
13. State of U.P. v. Narendra Pal Singh 1990 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1637 .
CASE LAWS:
The court, while emphasizing on the freedom of speech and not the dignity of the court, in R v.
Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis dictated that … “no criticism of a judgment, however
vigorous, can amount to contempt of court, provided it keeps within the limits of reasonable
courtesy and good faith. The criticism here complained of, however rumbustious, however wide
of the mark, whether expressed in good taste or in bad taste, seems to me to be well within those
limits.”
In the case of Surya Prakash v. Madhu Trehan, the Delhi High Court imprisoned the editor
and publisher of Wah India for printing and publishing an article evaluating judges under disparate
criteria. This decision was in contrary to Mulgaokars case, where Apex court considered that
articles which appeared in The Indian Express, which inter alia stated that the Supreme Court of
India was “packed by Indira Gandhi with pliant and submissive judges”, did not amounted to
contempt. In the words of Chief Justice Beg: “The judiciary cannot be immune from criticism. It
may be better in many cases for the judiciary to adopt a magnanimously charitable attitude even
when utterly uncharitable and unfair criticism of its operations is made out of bona fide concern
for improvement.”
Unfortunately, the contempt of court in this country, also suffers from the evils of nepotism and
preferential treatment. For instance, in P.N. Duda v. V. P. Shiv Shankar & Others the judiciary
acquitted former union law minister P. Shiv Shankar when he publically stated that the Supreme
Court was meant for the “diamond smugglers, bride burners, mafia and corrupt”. His assertions
against the Apex Court were considered as his personal feelings and in public interest. Fali Sam
Nariman29, questioned that if such a comment had been made by a common man, whether court
decision would have been still the same.
In the case of Conscientious Group v. Mohammad Yunus and Others, Mohammad Yunus (Ex.
Chairman of Trade Fair Authority of India) stated that judges are anti-national. The court did not
took any actions against Yunus. Similar were the facts in the case of Mohammad ZahirKhan v.
Vijay Singh, where Mr. Mohd. Zahir Khan stated "Either he is an anti-national or the judges are
anti-nationals", for the courts. But the court imprisoned him for the duration of one month.
The question which arises over here is, ‘Is there any consistency or certainty in the law?’ Today,
the court’s authority to chastise those who malign its jurisdiction is applied differently and
discriminately. The protocol is imperious. Thus, the aftereffects are uneven which again raises
question on the dignity and authority of the judiciary.

1. Louis Dembitz Brandeis was an American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to
1939.
2. K. Balasankaran Nair, LAW OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN INDIA, (v) (2004).
3. AG v. Leveller Magazine Ltd. [1979] AC 440, p. 449s
4. Lord Diplock in Attorney General v. Times News Paper Ltd. (1973) 3 All. E.R. 54, 71.
5. Article 129: 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.
6. Article 215: 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.
7. Justice Markandey Katju, It’s time to amend law on contempt of court, The Times of India, July 29, 2014.
10. Act 6 of Contempt of Court amendment act 2006.
11. State of U.P. v. Das Vidhi 1973 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1271.
12. S.C. Tyagi v. N.C. Gupta 1974 Cri. L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 428.
13. State of U.P. v. Narendra Pal Singh 1990 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1637 .
CONCLUSION:
Contempt jurisdiction is applied for maintaining the majesty of law and also to assert impartial and
uninterrupted administration of justice. The Constitution gives power to the judiciary and all public
power is held as a trust. If the judges breach this trust they are required to pay for it. The judicature
is a noble and never ending institution. If judges frivolously bring the judicial institution into
shame, they are required to be condemned. The judiciary is a magnanimous authority, elegant and
majestic, and it sustains the belief of the nation. But if the judiciary behaves as crème de la crème38
and disaffirms the rights of the general masses, they have to face accountable criticism. The best
ammunition of a judge is his character of integrity, virtue and learning. Any judge will hardly
require the contempt power if the law of contempt can be more specified. The purpose of the law
of contempt is neither to boastfully condemn a true criticism nor to defend the authority and dignity
of the judges. Moreover, the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 is still ambiguous at various aspects of
law and there is a need to be delineate its jurisdiction to maintain the supremacy of rule of law.
Rule of law is a sine qua non for a functionally conscious democracy. Hence, the aspects of
contempt of court are again needed to be reformed to uphold the dignity of the judicature.

References:

1. Legal Ethics Accountability for Lawyers and Bench- Bar Relationship, Dr Kailash Rai

2. Constitution of India, V.N Shukla

3. Law of Contempt and Legislature, Justice Tek Chand

4. History of Contempt, Sir John C Fox

5. Article of journal on Contemporary Issues of Law.

1. Louis Dembitz Brandeis was an American lawyer and associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to
1939.
2. K. Balasankaran Nair, LAW OF CONTEMPT OF COURT IN INDIA, (v) (2004).
3. AG v. Leveller Magazine Ltd. [1979] AC 440, p. 449s
4. Lord Diplock in Attorney General v. Times News Paper Ltd. (1973) 3 All. E.R. 54, 71.
5. Article 129: 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.
6. Article 215: 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.
7. Justice Markandey Katju, It’s time to amend law on contempt of court, The Times of India, July 29, 2014.
10. Act 6 of Contempt of Court amendment act 2006.
11. State of U.P. v. Das Vidhi 1973 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1271.
12. S.C. Tyagi v. N.C. Gupta 1974 Cri. L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 428.
13. State of U.P. v. Narendra Pal Singh 1990 Cri.L.J. (Allahabad High Court) 1637 .