Origin and development of Contempt law in India

The Contempt of Court is a serious matter requiring suitable punishment to uphold the dignity
of the court and administration of justice. The power of court to punish for its contempt was
exercised by the court much before the enactment of statutory provisions relating to the
contempt of Court. The existing law relating to the contempt of court is essentially of English
origin and, therefore the study of the scheme of the contempt law in indigenous systems in
India is not of much use for our parent’s purpose. The indigenous legal systems of India was
based as they were on the concept of a law above the sovereign and his Courts and functioning
as they did, in times when means of communication were slow and publication of anything but
a small scale well nigh impossible neither possessed nor needed anything like elaborate system
of contempt law such as we have now.

There are many kinds of contempt of Courts, such as insult to judges, attacking them,
comments on pending proceedings with a tendency to prejudice trial, obstruction to officers of
Courts, witness or parties abusing the process of Court, breach of Duty by officers of the Courts
and scandalizing Judges of Court.

Meaning and Definition of contempt of Court :

According to Corpus Jurist Secondum, The Contempt of Court is disobedience to

According to Halsbury, " Any act done or writing published which is calculated to bring a Court
or Judge into disrepute or lower his authority or to interfere with the due course of justice or
the Lawful process of the Court is contempt of Court."

In the opinion of Oswald -

contempt of Court may be constituted by any conduct that trends to bring the
authority and admission of law in to disrespect or disregard to to interfere with or prejudice
parties, litigation, their witness during the litigation.

Contempt law in ancient India -

King was fountain of justice, judicial system and code of conduct in all walks of life.
Similarly, whosoever disobeyed decisions or orders or of Court or dictates or Ordinance issued
by King was held to have committed contempt or Avman, or Utkraman, Ullanghan and was
punished. Along with the filing of the plaint the temporary injunction could be obtained and
that was called as Asedhuh an injection was to be obeyed by the defendant till he appeared
and got it vacated. In Katyayan Smriti (104 to 105) there is a mention that in such
circumstances, in case an injection was served on the dependent and it was disobeyed it was
punishable. disobedience of the order of Court was contempt and was punishable.

Punishment was imposed -

For the contempt of court punishment provisions was made, the kinds of
punishment that could be awarded have been mentioned in Narada Smurti (1-47) Smriti
Chandrika as local arrest, temporary arrest, inhibition from traveling and restraining from doing
certain specific acts. The party on whom such restraint was imposed shall not break or disobey
the same.

A person who willfully violated a legal restraint properly imposed rendered himself liable to be
punished and on the other hand, the person who imposed a legal restraint without proper
grounds and under circumstances in which did not justify its imposition made himself liable to
penalty.

It can be thus safely said that the content of the concept of contempt of court was developed in
our judicial system since thousand years, to the date of India was brought under the foreign
law.

Read also.... Punishment for Contempt of Court

Introduction of Contempt law by Britisher in India -

The present law relating to contempt of Court is however, based on the English law concept.
the British courts from the earliest legal history assumed the power of contempt of court
against those who obstructed the administration of justice

In England, the Courts of Record have inherent powers to punish the contempt itself and
also the Court subordinate to it since the advent of judicial system. The Superior Court being
court of Record has inherent power to punish contempt of itself and courts subordinate to it.
Thus the contempt power of the Superior Court does not base on any statutory enactment but
on the common law principle that the concept is inherent in every court of record.

The contempt of law introduced in British India by setting up of the Court of Record through
a charter of 1687 issued by the East India company for the establishment of Mayor's Court at
Madras. Thereafter charter of 1726 occupied and important places in the development of the
administration of justice in India. Before 1726, there was no uniform judicial system in all three
Presidency towns, for example Bombay, Madras and Calcutta. The Mayor court was
reconstituted in 1753 and thereafter also, it remained the court of Record having power to
punish for contempt of Court. Even prior to it, when after 1704, the court of Admiralty ceased
to sit regularly appeals from the Mayor's Court lay to the governor in Council. The admiralty
court and the governor in Council may also be taken as Court of record as they heard appeals
from the Mayors Court of record.

In 1774, the Calcutta Mayor's Court was replaced by Supreme Court established under the
charge for granted in 1774 in 1st year and software regulating act 1773 in the Madras and
Bombay High Court continued till 1797 when they were superseded by the recorders
court. watch a court of record and it has power to punish for content there after the British
Parliament passes and act in 1893 The recorders court was a court of record and as such it had
power to punish contempt.

The Indian High Courts Act, 1861 replaced the Supreme Courts of Calcutta and Madras by
unification of Company's Court and Crowns Courts. The High Court was a Court of record, had a
power to punish for its Contempt.

The first Contempt of Court Act was enacted in the year 1926 which was repealed and
replaced by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952. The Act of 1952 made some notable changes,
the Act empowered the court of Judicial commissioner to punish the Contempt of court
subordinate to it. It was given to Jurisdiction to inquire into or try a Contempt of itself or any
Court subordinate to it.
However, the Contempt of Court Act, 1952 was not satisfactory as there were certain defects,
for example., The definition of Contempt of Court and defenses available to contemner etc. not
given.
There was no provision as to defenses of innocent Publication, fair and accurate report of
judicial proceedings, fair criticism of judicial decisions etc. Besides these defects, even the Act
did not contain any provision as to Contempt liability of the Judges and other persons acting
Judicially. The Act did not contain any provision to the procedure to be followed in the
Contempt proceeding and as to appeal in contempt cases. The above defects in the Act
compelled the Government to examine the existing Contempt law and to remove out the
defects therein. Accordingly on 1st April, 1960 a bill was introduced in Lok Sabha by Shri Bibhuti
Bhushan Dasgupta who amend the law relating to Contempt of Courts. After considering the
Bill, the Government realized need to Reform the law relating to Contempt of Court, and
Committee was set up by the Government under the Chairmanship of Shri H.N.
Sanyal, Additional Solicitor General of India in July 1961. The entire law on the Contempt
of Court was scrutinized by the Committee and then the Committee submitted its report on 28
February 1963 to Lok Sabha. The Bill was then referred to the joint select committee of the
parliament. The Committee submitted its report on 20 February 1970. The Bill was substantially
altered in the light of the said effect and thereafter, it enacted as the Contempt of Courts Act,
1971. This act came into force on 24 December 1971 and repealed replaced the earlier
Contempt of Court Act, 1952.

The provisions of this Act extends to the whole India, provided that it shall not apply
to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, except to the extent to which the provisions of this Act
relate to the content of Supreme Court. This Act is not exhaustive code Section 22 of the Act
provides that the provisions of this act shall be in addition and not in derogation of the
provisions of any other law relating to the Contempt of Courts. In this Act the definition of term,
"Contempt of Court" is along with important defenses. The Act makes provisions in respect of
liability of the Judges, Magistrates and other persons acting Judicially. It makes elaborate
provisions in respect of the procedures to be followed in the Contempt proceeding and also in
respect of the Appeal.