Page |1

RAYAT COLLEGE OF LAW, ROPAR

PROJECT: - PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

TOPIC: THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT,

1971

SUBMITTED TO:
DR.MONIKA SHARMA
SUBMITTEDBY:
AMAN KUMAR
10TH SEMESTER
ROLL NO. 13306
 Page |2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of

gratitude to my teacher Dr.Monika Sharma,

who gave me the golden opportunity to do this

wonderful project on the topic “THE

CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971” which

also helped me in doing a lot of Research and I

came to know about so many new things I am

really thankful to her.

 Page |3

DECALARATION

I hereby declare that the project work entitled “THE

CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971 ” submitted to the
Rayat College of, is a record of an original work done by
me under the guidance of Dr.Monika , this project work
is submitted in the partial fulfilment of the requirements
for the award of the degree of law. The results embodied
in this thesis have not been submitted to any other
University or Institute for the award of any degree or
diploma.

(SIGNATURE)

AMAN KUMAR

Date: 24TH MARCH, 2020

 Page |4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 6

 Origin of Contempt of Court 6

History of Law of Contempt in India 7

Essentials of Contempt of Court 9

Civil Contempt 10

Defences to Civil Contempt 10

 Criminal Contempt 11

Punishment for Contempt of Court 11

Remedies against an order of Punishment 12

 Contempt Proceedings 12
 Contempt committed outside the court 13
 Limitation 13
 Landmark Contempt Judgments 14

Famous cases of contempt 14

Conclusion 16

 Webliography 16

QUIESTIONNARE 17
 Page |5

TABLE OF CASES
1. Indirect Tax Practitioners Association vs. R.K.
Jain (2010) 8SCC 281
2. Justice C.S. Karnan vs. the Honourable
Supreme Court of ... on 23 August, 2017
3. P.N. Duda vs V. P. Shiv Shankar & Others, 1988
AIR SC 1208
4. R. Rajagopal vs State Of T.N, 1995 AIR SC 264
5. Re:Arundhati Roy…. … vs — on, 2002 AIR
(SCW) 1210
6. Subrata Roy Sahara vs. Union of India & Ors
(2014) 8 SCC 470
7. Sudhakar Prasad vs. Govt. of A.P. and Ors,
(2001) 1 SCC 516
8. Supreme Court Bar Association vs. Union of
India & another’s AIR 1998 SC 1895
9. Zahira Habibullah Sheikh & Anr vs. State of
Gujarat & Ors, (2004) 4 SCC 158
 Page |6

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

INTRODUCTION:-

The true essence of democracy lies in free and independent judiciary,

committed to the cause of dispensing justice. The Judiciary is rightly called the
guardian of the constitution; therefore it can legitimately be termed as the
saviour of rights of the common man. Of all the branches of democracy across
the world, Judiciary is the most revered one. Judiciary and Judicial Officers are
taken into high regard in the public arena, because they are the ones who are
bestowed with the very important and noble duty of providing justice to
millions of those who are downtrodden, needy and approach the court with a ray
of hope to get their long fought legal battle to a righteous end. Therefore, in
order to maintain the sanctity of Judiciary, the courts are empowered with the
jurisdiction to take actions against those who are responsible for ‘contempt of
court.’ India witnessed the genesis of three legal instruments to reach to the
final law on Contempt of Court that is applicable today; The Contempt of Court
Act 1971. The present Act evolved from the Contempt of Court Act 1926 and
the Contempt of Court Act 1952.

Origin of Contempt of Court:-1

The legal system that we see today is the summit of the long journey which has
started from the divine rule that was in proclamation to the natural law and more
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 same 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
1
www.huffingtonpost.in
 Page |7

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:-2

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 had 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
2
https://blog.ipleaders.in
 Page |8

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 around the law of contempt.

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
was 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 know something about the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.

Contempt of Courts Act 1971:-3

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 Contempt’ and
‘Criminal Contempt’. There is a case of Noorali Babul Thanewala v. K.M.M.
Shetty 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 several provisions given that it does not amount to Contempt
of Court.

These are:
3
https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in
 Page |9

a. Innocent publication of a matter or its distribution does not amount to

Contempt of Court.
b. Publishing of fair and accurate reports of the judicial proceedings does
not amount to Contempt of Court.
c. 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 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:-4

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 ‘wilfully’ in case of Civil Contempt.
2. In Criminal Contempt ‘publication’ is the most important thing and this
publication can be either spoken or written, or by words, or by signs, or
by visible representation.
3. The court should make a ‘valid order’ and this order should be in
‘knowledge’ 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.

Types of Contempt of Court in India:-5

4
www.latestlaws.com
5
https://law.freeadvice.com
 P a g e | 10

Civil Contempt: Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 states Civil
Contempt as wilful disobedience to the order, decree, direction, any judgment or
writ of the Court by any person or wilfully breach of undertakings by a person
given to a Court. Since Civil Contempt deprives a party of the benefit for which
the order was made so these are the offences essential of private nature. In other
words, a person who is entitled to get the benefit of the court order, this wrong
is generally done to this person.

Defences to Civil Contempt: A person who is accused of Civil Contempt of

case can take the following defences-

 Lack of Knowledge of the order: A person cannot be held liable for

Contempt of Court if he does not know the order given by the court or he
claims to be unaware of the order. There is a duty binding on the
successful party by the courts that the order that has passed should be
served to the Individual by the post or personally or through the certified
copy. It can be successfully pleaded by the contemnor that the certified
copy of the order was not formally served to him.
 The disobedience or the breach done should not be : If someone is
pleading under this defence then he can say that the act done by him was
not done wilfully, it was just a mere accident or he/she can say that it is
beyond their control. But this plead can only be successful if it found to
be reasonable otherwise your plead can be discarded.
 The order that has disobeyed should be vague or ambiguous: If the
order passed by the court is vague or ambiguous or this order is not
specific or complete in itself then a person can get the defence of
contempt if he says something against that order. In R.N. Ramaul v.
State of Himachal Pradesh this defence has been taken by the
respondent. In this case, the Supreme Court has directed the corporation
of the respondent to restore the promotion of the petitioner from a
particular date in the service. But the respondent has not produced the
monetary benefit for the given period and a complaint was filed against
him for Contempt of Court. He pleads for the defence on the given
evidence that it has not mentioned by the court in order to pay the
monetary benefit. Finally, he gets the defence.
 Orders involve more than one reasonable interpretation: If the
contempt of any order declared by the court and the order seems to be
given more than one reasonable and rational interpretation and the
 P a g e | 11

respondent adopts one of those interpretations and works in accordance

with that then he will not be liable for Contempt of Court.
 Command of the order is impossible: If compliance of the order is
impossible or it cannot be done easily then it would be taken as a defence
in the case of Contempt of Court. However, one should differentiate the
case of impossibility with the case of mere difficulties. Because this
defence can be given only in the case of the impossibility of doing an
order.

Criminal Contempt: According to Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Court Act,

1971, Criminal Contempt is defined as

a) the publication of any matter by words, spoken or written, or by gesture,

or by signs, or by visible representation or
b) doing of any act which includes:
 Scandalize or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the
authority of any court, or
 Biasness, interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of any
type of Judicial proceedings, or
 Obstructs or tends to obstruct, interfere or tend to interfere with the
administration of justice in any manner.

Punishment for Contempt of Court:-6

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.

6
http://www.legalserviceindia.com
 P a g e | 12

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.

Remedies against an order of Punishment:-7

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 tends 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.

Contempt Proceedings:-8

Section 14 of the Contempt of Court deals with the procedure of contempt

proceeding in the face of the court of record whereas Section 15 of this Act
deals with the procedure of the contempt proceeding outside the court of
records.

These courts of record have got the power to punish for its contempt inherently.
Therefore, these courts of record can deal with the matter of content by making
their own procedure. While exercising the contempt jurisdiction by the courts of
record the only case to be observed is that the procedure adopted must be fair
and reasonable in which the alleged contemnor should be given full opportunity
to defend himself. If the specific charge against the person who is punished for
the contempt is distinctly stated and he is given a reasonable opportunity to
answer and to defend himself against the charge then only he will be liable for
contempt of court and the court proceeding runs against him. Where the person
charged with contempt under this section applies whether orally or in writing to
have the charge against him, tried by some judge other than the judge or judges
in whose presence or hearing the contempt is alleged to have been committed
7
https://criminal.findlaw.com
8
https://www.livemint.com
 P a g e | 13

and the court is of the opinion that it is necessary in the interest of justice that
the application should be allowed, it shall cause the matter to be transferred
before such judge as the Chief Justice may think fit and proper under the
circumstances of the case or placed before the Chief Justice with the statement
of facts of the case.

Contempt committed outside the court:-9

Criminal Contempt rather than Civil Contempt committed outside the Court.
Section 15(1) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 deals with the notice of
Criminal Contempt by Court of Record such as the Supreme Court and the High
Court. Following manners can be taken by the Supreme Court and the High
Court for cognizance of the Criminal Contempt:

1. On the motion of court of records.

2. On the motion of the Advocate General of the Supreme Court and the
High Court.
3. If any person proceeds the motion with the consent of the Advocate
General in writing.
4. If the law officer who is related to the High Court for the Union Territory
of Delhi as the Central Government notify proceeds the motion. Then it
can be considered as contempt committed outside the court.

Section 15(2) of this Act states that in the criminal contempt of the subordinate
court, the high court may take certain actions in the manner given in this Act.

Limitation:-10

Section 20 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 deals with the limitation for the
action of Contempt. It states that no court shall initiate any proceedings of
contempt in two conditions:

Either the proceedings are on his own motion, or,

After the period of one year from the date on which the contempt is
alleged to have been committed.

Landmark Contempt Judgments:-

Supreme Court Bar Association vs. Union of India & another’s11

9
https://blog.ipleaders.in
10
www.investopedia.com
11
AIR 1998 SC 1895
 P a g e | 14

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 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.

Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and Anr vs. State of Gujarat & Ors,12

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 have also
not given.

Sudhakar Prasad vs. Govt. of A.P. and Ors13

 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.

Famous cases of contempt:-

P.N. Duda vs V. P. Shiv Shankar & Others14

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’.

R. Rajagopal vs State Of T.N 15

This case is also known as the Auto Shankar case; in this case, Justice Jeevan
Reddy invoked the very famous doctrine of John Sullivan. This doctrine states
12
(2004) 4 SCC 158
13
(2001) 1 SCC 516
14
1988 AIR SC 1208
15
1995 AIR SC 264
 P a g e | 15

that public must be open to strict comments and accusations as long as made
with bonafide diligence, even if it is untrue.

Re: Arundhati Roy Case16

In this case, the Supreme Court observed that the fair criticism on the conduct
of a Judge or the institution of Judiciary and its function may not amount to
contempt if it is made in good faith and in the public interest.

Subrata Roy Sahara vs. Union of India & Ors 17

Contempt of Court is succinctly described by the Bench of Hon'ble Jagdish

Singh Khehar and Hon'ble K.S Radhakrishnan in the Supreme Court of
India in Subrata Roy Sahara versus Union of India:

“Non-compliance of the orders passed by this court shakes the very foundation
of the judicial system and undermines the rule of law, which we are bound to
honour and protect. This is essential to maintain the faith and confidence of
people of this country in the judiciary.”

Indirect Tax Practitioners Association vs. R.K. Jain18

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.

Justice C.S. Karnan vs. the Honourable Supreme Court of India on 23

August, 2017

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

16
2002 AIR (SCW) 1210
17
(2014) 8 SCC 470
18
(2010) 8SCC 281
 P a g e | 16

Higher Judiciary of Corruption. He wrote a letter to PM Modi against this but

he did not provide any evidence against them.

Conclusion:-

The existing role relating to ex facie contempt of lower courts is unsatisfactory

and misleading in India. It appears that evidently, the difficulties in this regard
are the after product of overlap of contempt powers under the Indian Penal
Code, Contempt of Courts Act and contempt powers of the Supreme Court and
High Court under the Indian constitution. The scenario has emerged as more
complicated by way of the inconsistent interpretations followed through the
Supreme Court and High Court regarding diverse provisions under the Indian
Penal Code dealing with interference with the administration of justice and
exclusion clause contained in the Contempt of Courts Act. Not only the higher
court should be given the power to deal with contempt but also the lower court
should be given this power. Contempt of Court if seen from the perspective of
the judges, higher judicial officials seems good but if it comes to the perspective
of common people it turns towards its bad effect.

Webliograpghy

 www.huffingtonpost.in
 https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in
 https://blog.ipleaders.in
 www.latestlaws.co
 https://law.freeadvice.com
 http://www.legalserviceindia.com
 www.investopedia.com
 https://criminal.findlaw.com
 https://www.livemint.com

QUIESTIONNARE

Q.1= which instances ‘do not’ constitute contempt of court within the ambit of
this act?
 P a g e | 17

1. Publication of any matter in any form which has the tendency to

interfere or obstruct the course of justice in any civil or criminal
proceeding if; it is published while the case is pending but the person
doing so does not have any reasonable ground to believe so, if the
publication is made after completion of the case and if the person
distributing such publication didn’t have any reason to believe that it
contain any matter as aforesaid.
2. Publishing a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding or any
stage thereof.
3. Publication of any fair comment on the merits of any case which has
been finally decided.
4. Any statement made by a person in good faith concerning the
presiding officer of any subordinate court to any other subordinate
court, or the High Court, to which it is subordinate.
5. Publication of information relating to proceeding in chambers or in
camera except in certain cases.
6. Publication of a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding
before any court sitting in chambers or in camera.

Q.2= However, lack of knowledge or neglect on part of such persons with

regard to contempt, can serve as a valid defence against such punishment?

The accused may be discharged or the punishment awarded to him may be

remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the court. Provided that an
apology shall not be rejected merely on the ground that it is qualified or
conditional if the accused makes it bona fide.

Q.3= what is the procedure to be followed in case contempt is committed in the

face of the Supreme Court or a High Court?

In case the Supreme Court or the High Court finds a person guilty of contempt,
committed in its presence or hearing, the court may cause;

 Such person to be detained in custody, and,

 To be informed in writing of the contempt charges against him at any
time before the rising of the court, on the same day, or as early as
possible;
 To have an opportunity to make his defence;
 To proceed with the matter determining the charge, by conducting a fair
hearing, considering all the evidence;
 P a g e | 18

 To make such order for the punishment or discharged of such person as

may be just.
 To place before the Chief Justice, the application and facts of the matter
of the contempt case, for his approval, if the person, charged with this
offence of contempt, makes an application for his case to be tried by a
judge who was not present in the court when the matter took place and
the court thinks it fit in the interest of justice to so.
 To discharge such person from punishment on his executing a bond
without sureties for his attendance as aforesaid, if it thinks it fit to do so.

Q.4= what is the procedure to be followed in cases of criminal contempt (other

than the courts?

The Supreme Court or the High Court may take cognizance of the offence by
themselves or by any motion passed by the Advocate- General or by any other
person with the Advocate- General’s consent. In the case of any criminal
contempt of a subordinate court, the High Court may take action on a reference
made to it by such subordinate court. And, every such motion or reference
should mention the charge of contempt.

Q.5= what are the provisions related to Contempt of Court by a Judge,

magistrate or other person acting judicially?

A judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially shall also be liable for
contempt of his own court or of any other court in the same manner as any other
individual is liable and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply
accordingly. However, no observations or remarks made by a judge, magistrate
or other person acting judicially, regarding a subordinate court in an appeal or
revision pending shall be taken as contemptuous.