Contempt of Court definition

"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 to
inhibit citizens from availing themselves of it
for the settlement of their disputes."This
definition is given by Lord Diplock when he
was giving the judgment in the case of

Attorney-General v Times Newspapers Ltd.

[1]

This term Contempt of Court can be easily

understood as when we are disrespectful or
disobedience towards the court of law
which means that we wilfully fail to obey
the court order or disrespect the legal
authorities. Then the judge has the right to
impose sanctions such as fines or can send
the contemnor to jail for a certain period of
time if he is found guilty of Contempt off
Court.
This term can also be understood in terms of
the freedom of limits of the judicial
proceeding. As we know that all judges in
courts can give judicial proceedings which
have a certain limit in which it has the
freedom to make any judicial proceeding
and anything which curtails or stops it in
making any judicial proceeding which is of
necessity can amount to contempt of court.
Halsbury, Oswald, and Black Odgers have
also given the definition of Contempt of
Court and in addition to that, they have
talked about its misuse and its wrong
interpretation and also its broad prospectus.

In India, the concept of Contempt of Court is

defined in Section 2(a) of the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971 which has broadly describe
it as civil contempt or criminal contempt.

There are two Articles in the Constitution of

India which talk about the Contempt of
Court and these are Article 129 and
Article
142(2).
Origin of Contempt of Couurt
The legal system that we see today is the
summit of the long journeyy which has
started from the divine rule that was in
proclamation to the natural law and morre
further to the positive law that we see today.
Contempt of Court is a matter which regards
that justice should be administered fairly
and it also punishes anyone who aims to
hurt the dignity or authority of the judicial
tribunals. This law has its origin from the
medieval times when the royal powers of
the monarch were transferred to the court
and at this time the monarch was believed
to be appointed by God and everyone was
accountable to him. This power of
accountability clearly depicts the samne
accountability the Supreme Court possesses
nowadays under Article 129 and 142 of the
Indian constitution against its contempt. In
the English medieval ages the Judiciary was
an important tool of the Monarch. At that
time these judges and legislatures were
representatives of the divine rule monarchy
and these judges and legislatures played an
important role in legitimizing the functions
of these monarchs. The king was the
of these monarchs. The king was the
superior head of justice and this power he
has given to the judicial system and if
anyone or the king himself disrespect or
question the courts it became a challenge to
the superiority of the king and as well as to
his wisdom. So, this can be seen as although
the source of the law has transformed in the
society the unquestionability quality that a
king enjoyed was upheld by the monarchy.
There is a case of contempt against J. Almon
in the year 1765; a statement was made by
the Irish judge Sir Eardley Wilmot in regard
to this contempt attacks on the judges. In
this case, Almon has published a pamphlet
libelling the decision of the bench of kings
and the judgment given by the judge had
given rise to many questions of several
aspects of the judiciary which had not been
questioned yet. This matter gives a great
push in the establishment of the contempt of
court. This judgement also recognised that
the unbiasedness is also one of the features
of the judiciary in making the decision
which makes this institution different from
its peer institutions.
History of Law of Contempt in
India
Sanyal Committee report deals with the
historical aspect of the Law of Contempt in
India. This committee has been responsible
for starting the amendment process in this
law. The law of contempt similar to many
other laws has been brought from the
English laws and statutes but this law has
not been absolutely taken from the English
laws it has other origins too. How has the
indigenous development of contempt law
taken place? It can be understood by the
age-old system which our country was
having to protect court or assemblies
(sabhas) in the past. We know about the
philosopher Kautilya, in his book
Arthashastra has written about the
governance at that time. He has written that
Any person who exposes the king or insults
his council or make any type of bad attempt
on the kings then the tongue of that person
should be cut off." Adding to this statement,
he also said that "When a judge threatens,
bully or make silence to any of the
disputants in the court then he should be
punished."
Until the year 1952, there were no statutory
provisions for the contempt of court in India
but after the enactment of Contempt of
Court Act,1952 statutory provisions for
contempt of court in India has established.
This Act extends to the whole of India except
Jammu and Kashmir. This Act gives power
to the High Court to punish contempt of the
subordinate court. This Act has repealed the
existing law from the Contempt of Court Act,
1926 that was prevailing in the state of
Rajasthan and the state of Saurashtra.
Although this Act was extended to the whole
of Bangladesh. It can be surprising knowing
that although these Acts have been
introduced earlier then also these Acts do
not give the definition of the term
Contempt' and also there was still a lot of
ambiguity present aroundd the law of
contempt. This law has to be dealt with in
light of two fundamental rights given by our
Indian Constitution and these rights are (i)
freedom of speech and expression and (ii)
right to personal liberty.
There was a bill introduced in the Lok Sabha
to make any changes or to make the existing
law relating to contempt more strong. This
law was introduced by Shri B B Das Gupta
on 1st of April 1960. The government after
examining the bill discern the need for
reform in the existing Act. So, they made a
special committee to look into the matter or
inspect the existing Act. This committee waas
set up in 1961, under the chairmanship of
H.N. Sanyal which gives its report on 28th
February, 1963. The report of this committee
took the form of Contempt of Court Act,
1971. The procedure and application of
enactment something that was done earlier
by the Contempt of Court Act of 1926 and
1952 was given several changes through the
Contempt of Court Act, 1971. This Act
segregates the Contempt of Court into
criminal and civil contempt with their
definition respectively. This thing was not
mentioned in the earlier existing courts.
Now, let us knovw something about the
Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
2.0bfect of Contempt Law
Object of the contempt jurisdiction to uphold the majesty and dignity
is
of the law Courts. The image of such majesty in the minds of the public
cannot be allowed to be distorted. Action for contempt is not for the purpose

of_placing Judges in a position of immunity from criticism but is (aimed at

protection of
of the freedom of individuals) and the orderly and equal
administration of laws."
The object of proceedings in contempt of Court is to keep the stream of
justice unsullied and to maintain the confidence of the public at large in the,
fair and impartial administration of justice by the Court of law. If anybody
wrongly casts aspersions on the impartiality and fair dispensation of justice
by aCourt, he pollutes the purity of that stream and has to be punished.
The ebject of the law of contempt is not to vindicate the prestige or position
of a Presiding Officer of a Court, but to maintain
the continuity of the crystal
clear flow of the stream of justice. The
object of the law is not to provide a
cloak for judicial authorities to cover up their
to stifle criticism made in
inefficiency and corruption, or
good faith against such officers." The law of
contempt is intended to be a
protection to the public whose interest would
be very much affected, if by the act or the conduct of
any party the authority
of the Court is lowered and the sense of confidence
which people have in
the administration of justice by it, is weakened.
Thus, the punishment for contempt is
inflicted not for the
purpose of
protecting either the Court as a whole or the individual
Judges of the Court
from a repetition of the attack but for
protecting the public and speciallyy
chose who either voluntarily or by compulsion are
of the Court from the mischief they will incur, if the
subject to the jurisdiction
is undermined or impaired. Nothing is more incumbernt on
authority of the Tribunal
the Courts of
justice than to preserve their proceedings from being misrepresented; nor is
there anything of more pernicious consequence than to prejudice the minds
of the public.
In Attorney-General v. Times Newspapers Ltd. the Court has observed that
the very structure of ordered life is at risk, if the recognised courts of the
land are so flouted and their authority wanes and is supplanted.
The contempt law empowers the Judges to punish contempt to keep the
course of justice iree. It has rightly been observed that a court of justice
without power to vindicate its own dignity, to enforce obedience to its
mandates, to protect its officers or to shield those who are entrusted to its
care, would be an anomally which cannot be permitted to 'exist in any
civilized
civilized
community'Without such protection, Courts of justice would soon
lose their hold
upon the public respect and maintenance of law and order
would be rendered impossible. Hence it is that the
summary power oof
punishing the contempt has been given to the Court for keeping a blaze of
glory around them and for deterring people from attempting to render them
contemptible in the eves of the public:7
Contempts of Courts Act 1971
notes

This Act extended to the whole of India and

it has also provided that this Act shall not
apply to the state of Jammu and Kashmir
except in certain conditions in which the
provision of the Act is connected to the
Contempt of Supreme Court. Another thing
is that this Act provides the definition of
Contempt of Court which has not been given
by the earlier Act of Contempt of Court. This
Act under Section 2(a) defines Contempt of
Court as Civil Contempte and Criminal
Contempt. There is a case of Noorali Babul
Thanewala v. K.MM. Shetty [2] in which an
undertaking was given to a Court in civil
proceedings by a person, on the faith that
undertaking was correct the Court sanctions
a course of action in regard to that
undertaking but the undertaking seems to
be incorrect. Hence, this was considered as
misconduct and amount to Contempt of
Court. In this act there are
are several
provisions given that it does not amount to
Contempt of Court. Although, these
provisions have to be discussed later in this
article some of them you should know at
this point in time.
 These are: () innocent
publication of a matter or its distribution
does not amount to Contempt of Court. (ii)
publishing of fair and accurate reports of
the Judicial proceedings does not amount to
Contempt of Court. (ii) fair criticism on
judicial acts does not amount to Contempt of
Court. Next, in this Act, the High Court has
been given the power to make decisions on
the matter which is outside its jurisdiction.
Punishment for Contempt of Court has been
given in this Act and also what type of
of
misconduct not amount to Contempt of
Court has been given, how we can deal with
that contempt has also been given. The
Judge, Magistrate or any other person who
is acting judicially can also be contempt for
their actions. Also, this Act gives certain
limitations where this Act does not apply.
This Act does not apply to the Courts of
Nyaya Panchayat and other Courts of the
village. This Act repealed the old existing
Act of Contempt of Court which came into
force in 1952.
Essentials of Contempt of Court
If a person named Akash has to prove that
the other person named Sita is guilty of
committing an act which is an offence in a
court of law. Then he has to show the court
that the offence which Sita has done is
fulflling the essential required to commit
that act or not. If the essentials of that will
be fulfilled then he will be liable for that act.
Similarly, every offence has certainn
exceptions that has to be fulfilled for makinng
the person liable for doing that act.
Contempt of Court also has certain
essentials and these are as followS:
1. Disobedience to any type of court
proceedings, its orders, judgment, decree,
etc should be done willfully' in case of
Civil Contempt.
2. In Criminal Contempt publication' is the
most important thing and this publication
can bee either spoken or written, or byy
words, or by signs, or by visible
representation.
3. The court should make a 'valid order' and
this order should be in krnowledge' of the
respondent.
4. The action of contemnor should be
deliberate and also it should be clearly
disregard of the court's order.
These essentials should be fulfilled while
making someone accused of Contempt of
Court.