DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

“CONTEMPT OF COURT”

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: SUBMITTED BY:

Dr. Prem Kumar Gautam Nayanika Rawat

Assistant Professor (Law) Enrolment No- 150101085

Dr. RMLNLU, Lucknow Section- ‘B’

INTRODUCTION:

Contempt of court is the offense of being disobedient to a court . Being impudent to legal authorities
in the courtroom, or willfully failing to obey a court order may attract Contempt of Court
proceedings. A judge may impose punishment such as a fine or jail for someone found guilty of
contempt of court. Any act that makes the authority and administration of Law contempt or discount
or to impede with or prejudice parties or their witnesses during lawsuit. Words spoken or written
which obstruct or tend to obstruct the administration of justice publishing words which tend to bring
the administration of Justice into contempt, to prejudice the fair trial of any cause or matter which is
the subject of Civil or Criminal proceeding or in any way to barricade the cause of Justice. The
Common has divided contempt of court into two categories - civil and criminal. We will elucidate
them in more detail below and in later chapters, but in the simplest terms civil contempt is
committed when an order of the court made in civil proceedings is disobeyed. More often than not
its procedures are invoked by a party in whose favour an order has been made who wants to see it
enforced. The term criminal contempt is executed to all other contempt, but more often than not
those are contempt, which somehow impede with the administration of justice in a more general
way i.e. disrupting court proceedings, , or insulting a Judge. At times the dividing line between the
two forms of contempt becomes hazy.

WHAT IS CONTEMPT OF COURT?

As long ago as 1742 Lord Hardwicke L. C., delved into the meaning of the term “contempt of
court”, referring to three different kinds of actions that qualify as contempt of court: “One kind of
contempt is scandalising the court itself. There may be likewise a contempt of this court in abusing
parties who are concerned in causes here. There may also be a contempt of this court in prejudicing
mankind against persons before the cause is heard.”1

Halsbury’s Law of England defining “contempt of court” states: “Any act done or writing published
which is calculated to bring a court or a Judge into contempt, or to lower his authority, or to
interfere with the due course of justice or the lawful process of the court, is a contempt of court.
Any episode in the administration of justice may, however be publicly or privately criticised,
provided that the criticism is fair and temperate and made in good faith. The absence of any
intention to refer to a court is a material point in favour of a person alleged to be in contempt.” 2

A contempt of court is a matter which concerns the administration of justice and the dignity and
authority of judicial tribunals. The law dealing with contempt of courts is for keeping the
administration of justice pure and undefiled; and, jurisdiction in contempt is not a right of a party to
be invoked for the redressal of its grievances.3

1
In re : Read v. Huggonson, (1742) 2 Atk. 469
2
Halsbury's Laws of England (3rd Edn., Vol. 8) at p. 7
3
A. Ramalingam v. V. V. Mahalinga Nadar, AIR 1966 Mad. 21.
CONSTITUIONAL PROVISIONS

Rule of law, which is part of basic structure of the constitution, entails inter alia the right to
obtain judicial redress through administration of justice, which is the function of the Courts,
and is imperative for the functioning of a civilised society. To administer justice in an
undefiled manner, judiciary, as the guardian of Rule of Law, is entrusted with the
extraordinary power to punish misconduct aimed at undermining its authority or bringing the
institution into disrepute, whether outside or inside the courts. The law for contempt, with
power of imposing punishment, ensures respect for the courts in the eyes of the public by
guaranteeing sanction against conduct which might assail the honour of the courts. Indeed,
the courts must be able to discharge their functions without fear or favour4.

In Kapildeo Prasad Sah & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors.5, the Supreme Court held that
disobedience of court’s order would be a violation of the principle of Rule of Law. The law
of contempt can thus be considered to be the thread which holds together the basic structure
of the Constitution. And, the maintenance of dignity of the Court is one of the cardinal
principles of Rule of Law. The law of contempt must be judiciously pressed into service, and
must not be used as a tool to seek retribution. However, any insinuation to undermine the
dignity of the Court under the garb of mere criticism is liable to be punished.

Constitution of India –

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.

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 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.
4
In Re : Vinay Chandra Misra, AIR 1995 SC 2348
5
(1999) 7 SCC 569
The Constitution of India designates the Supreme Court and the High Courts as the Courts of
Record. It further grants the Supreme Court and every High Court the power to punish for
contempt of itself. While the Constitution does not define the term “court of record”, its
meaning is well understood across all jurisdictions. In Delhi Judicial Service Association, Tis
Hazari Court, Delhi v. State of Gujarat6 the Supreme Court applied the term to a court whose
acts and proceedings are enrolled for a “perpetual memory and testimony”. Once a court has
been declared to be a “court of record” by a statute, the power to punish for its own contempt
automatically ensues. Such a court also has the power to punish for the contempt of the courts
and tribunals subordinate to it. Additionally, a court of record has the power to determine the
question of its own jurisdiction.7

As the Supreme Court observed in the case of Pallav Sheth v. Custodian & Ors8, that there is
no doubt that the Supreme Court and High Courts are courts of record, and that the
Constitution has given them the power to punish for contempt, which power cannot be
“abrogated or stultified”.

Law of Contempt vis-à-vis Article 19(1)(a):

Freedom of speech and expression is regarded as the “lifeblood of democracy”; Article

19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees this freedom to the citizens of India. This right,
however, is not absolute, and is subject to certain qualifications i.e. reasonable restrictions on
the grounds set out in Article 19(2). One such ground relates to the contempt of court. The
Constitution, which has given its citizens right to freedom of speech and expression, has
given certain powers to the Judiciary to guard against the misuse of the same, to prevent the
right to freedom of speech and expression being so exercised that it damages the dignity of
the Courts or interferes with the ‘administration of justice’.

In Aswini Kumar Ghose & Anr. v. Arabinda Bose & Anr.9, the Supreme Court held that
while fair and reasonable criticism of a judicial act in the interest of public good would not
amount to contempt, it would be gross contempt to impute that Judges of the Court acted on
extraneous considerations in deciding a case.

Right to freedom of speech and expression does not embrace the freedom to commit
contempt of court30. And, in the garb of exercising right to freedom of speech and
expression, under Article 19(1)(a), if a citizen tries to assail the dignity of the court, or
undermine its authority, the court may invoke the power to punish for contempt, under
Article 129 or 215 as the case may be. Any law made by the Parliament or the application of
any existing law in relation to contempt of courts, would tantamount to a reasonable

6
AIR 1991 SC 2176.
7
Ravi S. Naik v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 1994 SC 1558.
8
AIR 2001 SC 2763.
9
AIR 1953 SC 75
restriction on the freedom of speech and expression10 . The defence of fair comment is
available even during the pendency of the proceedings11.

In addition to Article 129, the Supreme Court also draws power to investigate or punish any
contempt of itself from Article 142(2). This power of contempt under Article 142(2) lies
outside the confines of the Act 1971 and remains unaffected by the limitation under section
20 of the Act.12 It has also been observed that while the jurisdiction to punish for contempt of
court is different from the jurisdiction to punish an advocate for professional misconduct,
Article 142 could also be invoked for punishing professional misconduct.

In Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India13, the Court made certain observations
and partially set aside and modified its earlier order of In Re : Vinay Chandra Mishra14 on the
issue of restraining an advocate from appearing in the Court as punishment for established
contempt of court. It was held that “Punishing a contemner advocate, while dealing with a
contempt of court case by suspending his licence to practice, a power otherwise statutorily
available only to the Bar Council of India, on the ground that the contemner is also an
advocate, is, therefore, not permissible in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 142.”

THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT

To define and limit the powers of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts and to
uphold the majesty and dignity of law courts and their image in the minds of the public is no
way whittled down. Contempt of court " - Civil Contempt or Criminal Contempt

Civil contempt “- wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, order, writ or other process of
a court15

Criminal contempt " - 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 lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court ; or (ii)
Prejudices, or impede or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or
(iii) Interferes or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other
manner; 16

Power of High Court to punish contempt of subordinate courts –

Every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in
accordance with the same procedure, in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to and
exercises in respect of contempt of itself: -Provided that no High Court shall take cognizance
of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate Power of

10
J.R. Parashar v. Prashant Bhushan, AIR 2001 SC 3395.
11
Rama Dayal Markarha v. State of M.P., AIR 1978 SC 921.
12
Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. & Anr., AIR 1996 SC 2005.
13
AIR 1998 SC 1895
14
AIR 1995 SC 2348
15
[Sec. 2 (b)]
16
[Sec. 2 (c)]
High Court to try offences committed or offenders found outside jurisdiction .17 Punishment
for contempt of court (1) A contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for
a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand
rupees, or with both. : Provided the accused may be discharged or the punishment which was
awarded may be remitted on apology being made by the person. 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] to it where such contempt is punishable.18

ESSENTIALS OF CIVIL CONTEMPT OF COURT:

1. The making of a valid court order, 2. Knowledge of the order by respondent, 3. Ability of
the respondent to render Compliance, and 4. Wilful disobedience of the order.

The Limitation period for actions of contempt is a period of one year from the date on which
the contempt is alleged to have been committed [u/S. 20 of the Act ]

CRIMINAL CONTEMPT

The law of criminal contempt is there to protect and keep clean the administration of justice.
It may be committed in the face of the court (broadly speaking words spoken or acts done in
or in the confines of a court, which obstruct or interfere with the due administration of justice
or are calculated so to do) or outside the court (in general terms, words spoken or otherwise
published, or acts done, outside the court which are anticipated or likely to interfere with or
Hinder the due administration of justice). Set out below are some examples of conduct which
might be said to fall within this category - (a) conduct in the face of the court such as
committing an assault, insulting the court by language or manner, interrupting the
proceedings, photography or sketches of the judge, jurors, parties or witnesses, refusing to be
sworn or to give evidence or to answer a lawful question as a witness, misbehaviour by a
juror; (b) conduct outside the court, such as disgrace of the court by words written or spoken,
publishing words written or spoken calculated to prejudice the due course of justice, doing
any act (before, during or after the proceedings) calculated to prejudice the due course of
justice, interfering with receivers or with property under arrest in certain actions, interfering
with wards of court, impeding the service of process or forgoing or altering the process of the
court, disobedience to a witness summons, acting as a solicitor when not qualified.

CIVIL CONTEMPT

Conceivably the most prime role of civil contempt procedures is to supply the necessary
sanction when all else fails to secure compliance with orders of the court. Individuals can be
sent to prison, corporate bodies can be punished by fine and confiscation of assets, or by the
committal of their directors or other officers. The following are examples of conduct which
has been held to be a civil contempt of court - (a) Failure to carry out an undertaking given to
the court; (b) subject to certain restrictions, disobedience to a judgment or order for the

17
[Sec.11]
18
Indian Penal Code.(45 of 1860) [Sec.10]
payment of money within a specified period; (c) Disobedience to an order for the payment of
money into court in time;

COGNIZANCE OF CRIMINAL CONTEMPT IN OTHER CASES

Cognizance of criminal contempt in other cases. – (1) In the case of a criminal contempt,
other than a contempt referred to in section 14, the Supreme Court or the High Court may
take action on its own motion or on a motion made by- (a) the Advocate-General, or (b) any
other person, with the consent in writing of the Advocate General (2) In the case of any
criminal contempt of a subordinate court, the High Court may take action on a reference
made to it by the subordinate court or on a motion made by the Advocate-General or, in
relation to a Union territory, by such Law Officer as the Central Government may, by
notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf. [Sec.15]

PROCEDURE TO DECIDE CONTEMPT OF COURT HEARING OF CASES OF

CRIMINAL CONTEMPT TO BE BY BENCHES.

(1) Every case of criminal contempt under section 15 shall be heard and determined by a
Bench of not less than two Judges.19

APPEALS

(1) An appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of High Court in the exercise of
its jurisdiction to punish for contempt- (a) 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 :20

LIMITATION FOR APPEAL

An appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed- (a) in the case of an appeal to a Bench of the
High Court, within thirty days ; (b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within
sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against.21

opinion that the steps invariably taken by a judge to safeguard the interests of an offender
when the summary procedure is invoked should be similarly codified.

19
[Sec 18 ]
20
[Sec. 19]
21
[Sec 19 (4) ]
Contempt Of Courts-Some Case Studies

1) M.B. SANGHI, ADVOCATE v. HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

[AIR 1991 SC 1834:1991( 3 )SCC 600] –

In this case, unable to secure an ad-interim stay in favour of his client, the appellant, a
practicing Advocate, uttered certain words imputing motives to the Sub-Judge in refusing to
grant the stay.- It had the effect of scandalizing the Court and impairing confidence of public
in Court. Hence guilty of contempt. It was held that an apology should reflect remorse and
contrition of contemnor- Tendering 'unqualified apology' in case Court finds him guilty is not
sincere. Contemnor addicted to use of contemptuous language against Judges and tendering
apology and apology used merely a device to escape is not to be accepted - “It is well-settled
that an apology is not a weapon of defence to purge the guilty of their offence; nor is it
intended to operate as a universal panacea, but it is intended to be evidence of real
contriteness.”

IN RE: 1. SHRI SANJIV DATTA, DEPUTY SECRETARY,MINISTRY OF

INFORMATION & BROADCASTING [1995 SCC (3) 619]

In this case Suo moto contempt notice issued to a public servant and his advocates-.
Thereafter an affidavit was filed in the Supreme Court containing allegations against the
Court- Allegations made with intention of casting aspersions on the Court and attributing
motives to it- Accusing the Court of making mockery of established policy of Government of
India by permitting a foreign agency to undertake broadcasting from India against national
interest thereby undermining sovereignty of the nation-Unconditional apology of public
servant not accepted-Allegations made by the contemnor were intentional- Made with full
knowledge of its grave implications and therefore has potentiality of mischief-If not curbed
firmly, may assume proportion grave enough to sabotage the rule of law.

DHANANJAY SHARMA v.STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS [1995 (3) SCR 964] In
this case there was illegal detention of detenues by police officials in ranks of SP, DSP and
SHO. Then a Habeas Corpus petition filed in Supreme Court. The Police officials filing false
affidavits and giving false statements in Court- Besides, DSP and SHO effectively
pressurising one of detenues to file false affidavit and give false statement in Court.Even after
report of C.B.I. establishing factum of illegal detention of detenu by police personnel, latter
filing false affidavits in Court denying the facts. It was held that swearing of false affidavits
in a court of law amounts to criminal contempt as it has not only the tendency of causing
obstruction in due course of judicial proceedings, but also to impede, obstruct or interfere
with administration of justice- SP, DSP and SHO punished for committing contempt of
Court. Their apologies rejected being not apologies of truly repentant persons but made with
a view to escape punishment Conduct of Secretary, Department of Home in not filing
affidavit in response to Court's direction disapproved-Director General of Police warned to be
careful in future. Apologies tendered by these two, being genuine and bona fide, accepted.
CONCLUSION:

Contempt of Court common and in general refers to the conduct that disobeys disrespects or
insults the authority or dignity of a court. Often, contempt takes the form of actions that are
seen as damaging to the court's ability to administer justice. Judges typically have much
discretion in deciding whom to hold in contempt and the type of contempt. Those held in
contempt can include parties to a proceeding, attorneys, witnesses, jurors, people in or around
a proceeding, and officers or staff of the court itself. There are two types of contempt of
court: criminal contempt and civil contempt. Civil contempt often involves the failure of
someone to comply with a court order. Judges use civil contempt sanctions to pressurize such
a person into complying with a court order the person has violated. Criminal contempt
charges, on the other hand are punitive, meaning they serve to discourage future acts of
contempt by punishing the offender no matter what happens in the core proceeding. Someone
imprisoned for criminal contempt cannot secure their own release by deciding to comply with
the Court. Judges use various factors when deciding, whether to clutch someone in civil or
criminal contempt, including the nature of the underlying court pre-court proceeding
(criminal or civil) and the sternness of the contemnor's behaviour.
REFERENCES

 SCC Online
 Law of Constitution by M.P Jain
 Contempt of Court Act 1971
 http://www.mcrhrdi.gov.in/88fc/Week12/Contempt%20of%20Courts%20in%20
India.pdf
 https://acadpubl.eu/hub/2018-120-5/2/168.pdf
 http://www.nja.nic.in/Jounals_Publications_Newsletters/NJA%20Ocacasional%
20Paper%20Series%20No.2.pdf
 http://www.mgutheses.in/page/?q=T%202281&search=&page=&rad=