|
|
 |
|
|
Discussion
forum
— tell us what you think about issues relating to
media, women in media and journalism |
|
|
 |
| Bare
acts |
|
| The
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 |
| Introduction
|
| The
origin of the law of contempt in India can be traced
to the English law. In England, superior courts
of record have from the earliest times exercised
the power to commit for contempt those who scandalised
the court or the judges. The right of the Indian
high courts to punish for contempt was, in the first
instance, recognised by the judicial committee of
the Privy Council which observed that the offence
of the contempt of court and the powers of the high
courts to punish it are the same in such courts
as in the Supreme Court in England. |
|
Almost all the high courts in India, apart from
the chartered high courts have exercised the jurisdiction
inherent in a court of record from the very nature
of the court itself. It has been judicially accepted
throughout India that the jurisdiction was a special
one, inherent in the very nature of the court. The
first Indian statute on the Law of Contempt, i.e.,
the Contempt of Courts Act was passed in 1926. |
| It
was enacted to define and limit the powers of certain
courts in punishing contempt of courts. When the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 (XII of 1926) was in
existence in British India, various Indian states
also had their corresponding enactment. These states
were Hyderabad, Madhya Bharat, Mysore, Pepsu, Rajastha,
Travancore-Cochin and Saurashtra. State enactments
of the Indian states and the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1926 were replaced by the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1952 (32 of 1952). |
| An
attempt was made in April 1960 to introduce in the
Lok Sabha a bill to consolidate and amend the law
relating to contempt of courts. On an examination
of the bill, the government appears to have felt
that the law relating to contempt of courts was
uncertain, undefined and unsatisfactory and that
in the light of the constitutional changes which
have taken place in the country, it would be advisable
to have the entire law on the subject scrutinised
by a special committee set up for the purpose. |
| In
pursuance of that decision, a committee was set
up on July 29, 1961 and it submitted its report
on February 28, 1963 to define and limit the powers
of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts
and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto.
The Joint Select Committee of Parliament on Contempt
of Courts examined the issue in detail and a new
bill, the Contempt of Courts Bill, 1968 was prepared
by the committee. |
| Statement
of objects and reasons |
| It
is generally felt that the existing law relating
to contempt of courts is somewhat uncertain, undefined
and unsatisfactory. The jurisdiction to punish for
contempt touches upon two important fundamental
rights of the citizens, namely, the right to personal
liberty and the right to freedom of expression.
It was, therefore, considered advisable to have
the entire law on the subject scrutinised by a special
committee. |
| In
pursuance of this, a committee was set up in 1961
under the chairmanship of the late H N Sanyal, the
then additional solicitor general. The committee
made a comprehensive examination of the law and
problems relating to contempt of court in the light
of the position obtaining in our own country and
various foreign countries. The recommendations which
the committee made took note of the importance given
to freedom of speech in the Constitution and of
the need for safeguarding the status and dignity
of courts and interests of administration of justice. |
The
recommendations of the committee have been generally
accepted by the government after considering the
view expressed on those recommendations by the state
governments, union territory administrations, the
Supreme Court, the high courts and the judicial
commissioners. The bill seeks to give effect to
the accepted recommendations of the Sanyal Committee.
|
| Act
70 of 1971 |
| The
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971) was passed
by the Parliament in December 1971 and it came into
force w.e.f. December 24, 1971. |
| List
of amending act |
| The
Contempt of Courts (Amendment) Act, 1976 (45 of
1976) |
| Preamble
(December 24, 1971) |
| An
Act to define and limit the powers of certain courts
in punishing contempt of courts and to regulate
their procedure in relation thereto |
| 1.
Short title and extent |
|
(1) This Act may be called the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1971.
(2) It extends to the whole of 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 contempt of
the Supreme Court. |
| |
Comments
(i) The law of contempt of courts is for keeping
the administration of justice pure and undefiled.
While the dignity of the court is to be maintained
at all costs, the contempt jurisdiction, which is
of a special nature, should be sparingly used; Shakuntala
Sahadevram Tewari v. Hemchand M.Singhania, (1990)
3 Bom CR 82 (Bom).
(ii)
Proceedings of contempt are summary in nature
and also are sui generis; Golcha Advertising
Agency vs The State of Maharashtra, (1990)
2 Bom CR 262 (Bom).
|
| 2.
Definitions |
| |
In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:
(a)
'Contempt of court' means civil contempt or criminal
contempt.
(b) 'Civil contempt' means willful disobedience
to any judgement, decree, direction, order, writ
or other process of a court or willful breach
of an undertaking given to a court.
(c) 'Criminal contempt' means the publication
(whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs,
or by visible representation, or otherwise) of
any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever
which:
(i)
Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers
or tends to lower the authority of, any court,
or
(ii) Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere
with the due course of any judicial proceeding,
or
(iii) Interferes or tends to interfere with,
or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration
of justice in any other manner.
(a) 'High Court' means the high court for a
state or a union territory and includes the
court of the judicial commissioner in any union
territory.
|
| |
Comments
(i) There are three different sorts of contempt,
viz., scandalising the court, abusing parties who
are concerned in causes here and prejudicing mankind
against persons before the case is heard; In re:
St. James Evening Post, (1974) 2 ATK 469
(ii) Courts seek to punish acts or conduct calculated
to interfere with the administration of justice;
In re: P C Sen, AIR 1970 SC 1821.
(iii) Comment on pending case or abuse of a party
may amount to contempt when the case is tried by
a judge: Subhash Chand v S M Aggarwal, 1984
Crl LJ 481 (De.).
(iv) Judges by reason of their office are precluded
from entering into any controversy in columns of
the public press; The State v.Vikar Ahmed,
AIR 1954 Hyd 175.
(v) There is no special principle attached to the
press to comment, criticise or investigate the facts
of any case of the prejudice of the trial of the
case; Sukhdev Singh v Teja Singh, AIR 1954
SC 186.
(vi) No editor has a right to assume the role of
investigator to try to prejudice the court against
any person; The District Magistrate v M A Hamid
Ali Gardish, AIR 1940 Oudh 137.
(vii) It is time to stem institutionalised procrastination,
K V Venkatesh v. taluka executive magistrate,
AIR 1990 Kant 86.
(viii) The law relating to contempt of court is
well settled. 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;
Q.R. v. Gray, 1900 (2) QBD 36 (40)
(ix) Contempt by speech or writing may be by scandalising
the court itself, or by abusing parties to actions,
or by prejudicing mankind in favour of or against
a party before the cause is heard. It is incumbent
upon courts of justice to preserve their proceedings
from being misrepresented, for prejudicing the mind
of the people against persons concerned as parties
in causes before the cause is finally heard has
pernicious consequences. Speech or writings misrepresenting
the proceedings of the court or prejudicing the
public for or against a party or involving reflections
on parties to a proceeding amount to contempt. To
make a speech tending to influence the result of
a pending trial, whether civil or criminal is a
grave contempt. Comments on pending proceedings,
if emanating from the parties or their lawyers,
are generally a more serious contempt than those
coming from independent sources; State of Haryana
v Ch Bhajanlal, AIR 1993 SC 1348.
(x) In contempt proceedings there are essentially
two parties -- the court and contemporary; Shakuntala
Sahadevram Tiwari v. Hemachand M Singhania,
(1990) 3 Bom CR 82 (Bom).
(xi) The law of contempt must be strictly interpreted
and complied with before any person can be committed
for contempt; Roshan S Boyce v B R Cotton Mills
Ltd., AIR 1990 SC 1881.
(xii) Any willful disobedience to the orders of
the court to do or abstain from doing any act or
breach of any undertaking given to the court is
prima-facie civil contempt; Vidya Sagar v IIIrd
additional di.strict judge, Dehradun, 1991 All
CJ 586 (588); See also State of Assam v. V K
Vishnoi, 1993 (23) ATC 581 (587-588); State
of Orissa v. Bijaya Mohanty, (1993) 75 CLT
820 (830).
(xiii) Non caring of the warrant issued by the criminal
court amounts to criminal contempt; E Venkaiah
v. government of Andhra Pradesh, 1992 (3) ALT
193 (199).
|
| 3.
Innocent publication and distribution of matter
not contempt |
| |
(1)
A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court
on the ground that he has published (whether by
words, spoken or written, or by visible representations,
or otherwise) any matter which interferes or tends
to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct,
the course of justice in connection with any civil
or criminal proceeding pending at that time of publication,
if at that time he had no reasonable grounds for
believing that the proceeding was pending.
(2) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained
in this Act or any other law for the time being
in force, the publication of any such matter as
is mentioned in sub section (1) in connection with
any civil or criminal proceeding which is not pending
at the time of publication shall not be deemed to
constitute contempt of court.
(3) A person shall not be guilty of contempt of
court on the ground that he has distributed a publication
containing any such matter as is mentioned in sub
section (1), if at the time of distribution he had
no reasonable grounds for believing that it contained
or was likely to contain any such matter as aforesaid.
Provided that this sub section shall not apply in
respect of the distribution of: |
| |
|
(i)
Any publication which is a book or paper printed
or published otherwise than in conformity with the
rules contained in section 3 of the Press and Registration
of Books Act, 1867 (25 of 1867).
(ii) Any publication which is a newspaper published
otherwise than in conformity with the rules contained
in section 5 of the said Act. |
| |
Explanation
|
| |
|
For
the purposes of this section, a judicial proceeding
--
(a)
is said to be pending,
(b) in the case of a civil proceeding, when it
is instituted by the filing of a plaint or otherwise,
(c) in the case of a criminal proceeding under
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 [5 of 1898
(Note: now see Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(2 of 1974)], or any other law -
(i) where it relates to the commission of the
offence, when the chargesheet or challan is filed,
or when the court issues summons or warrant, as
the case may be, against the accused, and
(ii) in any other case, when the court takes cognisance
of the matter to which the proceeding relates,
and
(iii) in the case of a civil or criminal proceeding,
shall be deemed to continue to be pending until
it is heard and finally decided, that is to say,
in a case where an appeal or revision is competent,
until the appeal or revision is heard and finally
decided or, where no appeal or revision in preferred,
until the period of limitation prescribed for
such appeal or revision has expired,
(iv) Which has been heard and finally decided
shall not be deemed to be pending merely by reason
of the fact that proceedings for the execution
of the decree, order or sentence passed therein
are pending.
|
| |
Comments
(i) The liberty of free expression is not to be
compounded with a licence to make unfounded allegations
of corruption against judiciary; M R Prashar v Dr
Farooq Abdullah, (1984) 1 Cr LC 433.
(ii) The abuse of the liberty of free speech and
expression carries the case nearer the law of contempt;
M R Prashar v Dr Farooq Abdullah, (1984) 1 Cr. LC
433.
(iii) A defence of truth or justification is not
available to the publisher of a newspaper in proceedings
for contempt of court; managing director Vamin v
O P Bensal, 1982 Cr. LJ 322 (Raj).
(iv) Publication of reports of proceedings before
a court of law must be true, accurate and without
malice; Wasuddeoraoji v A D Mani, AIR 1951 Nag.
26. |
| 4.
Fair and accurate report of judicial proceeding
not contempt |
| |
Subject
to the provisions contained in section 7, a person
shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing
a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding
or any state thereof. |
| |
Comments
(i)
The words 'judicial proceeding' means day-to-day
proceedings of the court. The media reports must
represent a fair and accurate report of a judicial
proceeding and not be a one-sided picture; Subhash
Chand v S M Aggarwal, 1984 Cr LJ 481
(ii) While reproducing the court proceedings, no
words may be added, omitted or substituted; E T
Sen v E Narayanan, AIR 1969 Del 201.
(iii) Fair and accurate reporting of the judgment
is essential for the healthy administration of justice.
In re: Progressive Port and Dock Workers Union,
1984 Cr LJ 1061 (Ker). |
| 5.
Fair criticism of judicial act not contempt
- A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court
for publishing any fair comment on the merits of
any case which has been heard and finally decided. |
| |
Comments
(i) The nature and circumstances under which allegations
are made, the extent and the character of the publications
and similar other considerations have to be taken
into account in order to determine whether the act
complained of amounts to contempt. No action is
called for, if the criticism is reasonable and is
offered for the public good; In re: Guljari Lal,
1968 MPLJ 725 (730-731).
(ii) Judgments are open to criticism that must be
done without casting aspersions on the judges and
the judges and the courts and without adverse comments
amounting to scandalising the courts; advocate general
v Abraham George, 1976 Cr. LJ 158 (161).
(iii) A fair comment on the judgment of a court
could not constitute a contempt; state of Maharashtra
v Chandrakant Tripathi, AIR 1936 PC 141.
(iv) The publication in newspaper of reports of
proceedings before a court of law must be true;
state v Bhavani Prasad, AIR 1954 Nag 36.
(v) The criticism of a judge must take the form
of reasonable argument or exploitation; must be
made in good faith and free from the imputation
of improper motives; state of Uttar Pradesh v Brahma
Prakash, AIR 1950 All 556.
|
| 6.
Complaint against presiding officers of subordinate
courts when not contempt |
| |
A
person shall not be guilty of contempt of court
in respect of any statement made by him in good
faith concerning the presiding officer or any subordinate
court to -
(a) Any other subordinate court, or
(b) The high court to which it is subordinate.
Explanation - In this section, 'subordinate court'
means any court subordinate to a high court. |
| |
Comments
(i) A complaint or report about a judicial officer
of his dishonesty, partiality or other conduct unbecoming
of a court, made to an authority to whom it is subordinate,
is not contempt of court if all reasonable care
is taken by the makers to keep it confidential;
In re: Guljair Lal, 1968 MPLJ 725 (MP).
(ii) Immunity is provided to a citizen making a
complaint to the high court against a presiding
officer of a subordinate court so long as the complaint
is made in good faith; In re: court on its own motion,
1973 Cr LJ 1106 (P & H). |
| 7.
Publication of information relating to proceeding
in chambers or in camera not contempt except in
certain cases - |
| |
(1)
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act,
a person shall not be guilty of contempt of court
for publishing a fair and accurate report of judicial
proceedings before any court sitting in chambers
or in camera except in the following cases, that
is to say - |
| |
|
(a)
Where the publication is contrary to the provisions
of any enactment for the time being in force.
(b) Where the court, on grounds of public policy
or in exercise of any power vested in it, expressly
prohibits the publication of all information relating
to the proceeding or of information of the description
which is published.
(c) Where the court sits in chambers or in camera
for reason connected with public order or the security
of the state, the publication of information relating
to those proceedings,
(d) Where the information relates to secret process,
discovery or invention which is an issue in the
proceedings. |
| |
(2)
Without prejudice to the provisions contained in
sub section (1) a person shall not be guilty of
contempt of court for publishing the text or a fair
and accurate summary of the whole, or any part,
of an order made by a court sitting in chambers
or in camera, unless the court has expressly prohibited
the publication thereof on grounds of public policy,
or for reasons connected with public order or the
security of the state, or on the ground that it
contains information relating to secret process,
discovery or invention, or in exercise of any power
vested on it. |
| 8.
Other defences not affected - Nothing contained
in this Act shall be construed as implying that
any other defence which would have been a valid
defence in any proceedings for contempt of court
has ceased to be available merely by reason of the
provisions of this Act. |
| |
Comments
Since a proceeding in contempt is a quasi-judicial
proceeding, the precise nature of contempt must
be set out in the motion: Nazamunnissa Shaukat Ali
v Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, (1990)
1 Mah LR 329 (Bom). |
| 9.
Act not to imply enlargement of scope of contempt
- Nothing contained in this Act shall be construed
as implying that any disobedience, breach, publication
or other act is punishable as contempt of court
which not be so punishable apart from this Act. |
| |
Comments
The scope of contempt of courts has not been enlarged.
What was not contempt so far is not contempt of
court even now. The contempt of court should not
be resorted to only for the purpose of enforcing
interpretive rights; state of West Bengal v N N
Bagchi, AIR 1966 SC 447. |
10.
Power of high court to punish contempts of subordinate
courts - Every high court shall have and exercise
the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in
accordance with the same procedure and practice,
in respect of contempts of courts subordinate to
it and it has and exercise in respect of contempts
of itself.
Provided that no high court shall take cognisance
of a contempt alleged to have been committed in
respect of a court subordinate to it where such
contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian
Penal Code (45 of 1860). |
|
Comments
(i) The phrase 'courts subordinate to it' used
in section 10 is wide enough to include all courts
which are judicially subordinate to the high court
even though administrative control over them under
Article 235 of the constitution does not vest in
the high court; S K Sarkar, member, board of revenue,
U P Lucknow v Vinay Chandra Mishra, 1981 Cr LJ 283
(286).
(ii) The power of committal for contempt must be
wielded with the greatest reluctance and the greatest
anxiety and only with the object of seeing that
the dignity and authority of the court are not imposed;
E Chandra v member secretary, MMDA., (1990) 1 MLJR
537.
(iii) If the act is punishable by the Penal Code
as contempt of court then that act cannot form the
subject of contempt proceedings by the high court;
the emperor V J P Swadhin, Air 1938 All 358.
(iv) The high court cannot take cognisance of 'contempt'
which is punishable under the Indian Penal Code;
N K Gupta v Umraomal Agarwalla, AIR 1951 Cal 489. |
| 11.
Power of high court to try offences committed or
offenders found outside jurisdiction - A high
court shall have jurisdiction to inquire into or
try a contempt of itself or of any court subordinate
to it, whether the contempt is alleged to have been
committed within or outside the local limits of
its jurisdiction, and whether the person alleged
to be guilty of contempt is within or outside such
limits. |
| |
Comments
(i) This section provided for the extra-territorial
jurisdiction of high courts of commit a person for
contempt even though the act alleged was committed
outside its territorial jurisdiction; state v V
Adilakshmi Amma, 1954 Cr. LJ 988 (Ori).
(ii) This section expands the ambit of the authority
beyond with was till then considered to be possible
but it does not confer a new jurisdiction. It merely
widens the scope of our existing jurisdiction of
a very special kind; Sukhdev Singh v Teja Singh,
AIR 1954 SC 186 (190); state of Uttar Pradesh v
Radhey Shyam.
|
12.
Punishment for contempt of court - (1) Save
as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in
any other law, 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 that
the accused may be discharged or the punishment
awarded may be remitted on apology being made to
the satisfaction of the court.
Explanation - |
| |
An
apology shall not be rejected merely on the ground
that it is qualified or conditional if the accused
makes it bona fide.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law
for the time being in force, no court shall impose
a sentence in excess of that specified in sub section
for any contempt either in respect of itself or
of a court subordinate to it.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section,
where a person is found guilty of a civil contempt,
the court, if it considers that a fine will not
meet the ends of justice and that a sentence of
imprisonment is necessary shall, instead of sentencing
him to simple imprisonment, direct that the he be
detained in a civil prison for such period not exceeding
six months as it may think fit.
(4) Where the person found guilty of contempt of
court in respect of any undertaking given to a court
is a company, every person who, at the time the
contempt was committed, was in charge of, and was
responsible to, the company for the conduct of business
of the company, as well as the company, shall be
deemed to be guilty of the contempt and the punishment
may be enforced, with the leave of the court, by
the detention in civil prison of each such person.
Provided that nothing contained in this sub section
shall render any such person liable to such punishment
if he proves that the contempt was committed without
his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence
to prevent its commission.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub section
(4) where the contempt of court referred to therein
has been committed by a company and it is provided
that the contempt has been committed with the consent
or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect
on the part of, any director, manger, secretary
or other officer of the company, such director,
manager, secretary or other officer shall also be
deemed to be guilty of the be contempt and the punishment
may be enforced, with the leave of the court, by
the detention in civil prison of such director,
manager, secretary or other officer.
Explanation - For the purpose of sub sections (4)
and (5) - |
| |
(a)
'Company' means any body corporate and includes
a firm or other association of individuals, and
(b) 'Director' in relation to a firm, means a partner
in the firm. |
| |
Comments
Breach of an injunction, or breach of an undertaking
given to a court by a person in a civil proceeding
amounts to contempt; Noorali Babul Thanewala v K
M M Shetty, AIR 1990 Sc 564.
(i) Committing the contemner to prison is always
discretionary with the court; Shakuntala Sahadevram
Tiwari v Hemchand M Singhania, (1990) 3 Bom CR 82
(Bom).
(ii) The power to fine and imprison for contempt
is a necessary incident and attribute of a court;
Watson v Williams, (33) 36 Mis 341.
(iii) An unreserved apology, in less serious cases,
has the asset of taking the stringent of contempt;
court on behalf of the state of Punjab v Raddha
Krishan Khanna, AIR 1961 Punj 113.
(iv) The contempt power should be kept sheathed;
union of India v S C Sharma, (1980) 2 SCC 144.
(v) Apology is an act of contrition. Apology must
not be shorn of penitence. Tendering of apology
cannot be a panacea in every case of contempt. No
apology could undo gross contempt and serious cases
of contempt; state of Orissa v R N Patra, (1975)
41 Cut LT 329.
(vi) The court can, even when accepts the apology,
commit an offender to prison or otherwise punish
him; Rupert J Bamabas v N Bharani, 1990 LW (Crl)
27 (Mad).
(vii) A haulting, hesitating and vacillating apology
deserves to be rejected; state of Uttar Pradesh
v Krishna Madho, AIR 1952 All 86.
(viii) The court may or may not accept an apology
goes to sentence and cannot, therefore, be accepted
without a finding that contempt has been committed.
However, apology, though not a weapon of defence
forged always to purge the guilty, should be tendered
out the earliest possible stage, unreservedly and
unconditionally and it must be indicative of remorse
and contrition as well as free, full, frank and
manly confession of a wrong done; In re: Hirenn
Bose, AIR 1969 Cal 1. |
| 13.
Contempts not punishable in certain cases -
Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for
the time being in force, no court shall impose a
sentence under this Act for a contempt of court
unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of such
a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends
substantially to interfere with the due course of
justice. |
| |
Comments
(i) Every infraction of the court's order does not
amount to contempt of court; H S Butalia v Subhas
Saksena, 1974 Cr LJ 828 (Cal).
(ii) Technical contempts are to be ignored; Baradakanta
Mishra v the registrar, Orissa high court, AIR 1974
SC 710.
(iii) A party (or person) can be committed for contempt
only owing to any willful or deliberate or reckless
disobedience of the order of the court; Jiwani Kumari
v Satyabrata Chakraborty, AIR 1991 SC 326.
(iv) Exemplary costs may be awarded instead of imposing
a fine; Naamunnissa Shaukat Ali v Municipal Corporation
of Greater Bombay, (1990) Mah LR 329 (Bom). |
| 14.
Procedure where contempt is in the face of the Supreme
Court or a high court - (1) When it is alleged,
or appears to the Supreme Court or the high court
upon its own view, that a person has been guilty
of contempt committed in its presence or hearing,
the court may cause such person to be detained in
custody, and, at any time before the rising of the
court, on the same day, or as early as possible
thereafter, shall - |
| |
(a)
Cause him to be informed in writing of the contempt
with which he is charged.
(b) Afford him an opportunity to make his defence
to the charge,
(c) After taking such evidence as may be necessary
or as may be offered by such person and after hearing
him, proceed, either forthwith or after adjournment,
to determine the matter of the charge, and
(d) Make such order for the punishment or discharge
of such person as may be just. |
(2)
Notwithstanding anything contained in sub section
(1) where a person charged with contempt under the
sub 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 offence is alleged to have been committed,
and the court is of opinion that it is practicable
to do so and that in that interest of proper administration
of justice the application should be allowed, it
shall cause the matter to be placed, together with
a statement of the facts of the case, before the
chief justice for such directions as he may think
fit to issue as respects the trial thereof.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other
law, in any trial of a person charged with contempt
under sub section (1) which is held, in pursuance
of a direction given under sub section (2), by a
judge other than the judge or judges in whose presence
or hearing the offence is alleged to have been committed,
it shall not be necessary for the judge or judges
in whose presence or hearing the offence is alleged
to have been committed to appear as a witness and
the statement placed before the chief justice under
sub section (2) shall be treated as evidence in
the case.
(4) Pending the determination of the charge, the
court may direct that a person charged with contempt
under this section shall be detained in such custody
as it may specify.
Provided that he shall be released on bail, of a
bond for such sum of money as the court thinks sufficient
is executed with or without sureties conditioned
that the person charged shall attend at the time
and place mentioned in the bond and shall continue
to so attend until otherwise directed by the court.
Provided further that the court may, if it thinks
fit, instead of taking bail from such person, discharge
him on his executing a bond without sureties for
his attendance as aforesaid. |
| |
Comments
(i) Where contempt - |
| |
|
(a)
It committed in the presence or hearing of the Supreme
Court or the high court, or
(b) Is not committed in the presence or hearing
of the Supreme Court or the high court, but a complaint
is made immediately before the alleged contemner
leaves the precincts of that court, then the procedure
laid down in this section has to be adopted. |
| |
(ii)
If the court did not take action under section 14
then the procedure of section 15 cannot be adopted
later; Mansiha Mukherjee v Aashoke Chatterjee, 1985
Cr LJ 1224.
|
| 15.
Cognisance 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, (Note:- Ins. by Act 45
of 1976, sec.2)
(c) [(Note:- Ins. by Act 45 of 1976, sec.2)] In
relation to the high court for the union territory
of Delhi, such law officer as the central government
may, by notification in the official gazette, specify
in this behalf, or any other persons, with the consent
in writing of such law officer. |
(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.
(3) Every motion or reference made under this section
shall specify the contempt of which the person charge
is alleged to be guilty. |
Explanation
- In this section, the expression 'advocate-general'
means -
(a) In relation to the Supreme Court, the attorney
or the solicitor-general
(b) In relation to the high court, the advocate-general
of the state or any of the states for which the
high court has been established.
(c) In relation to the court of a judicial commissioner,
such law officer as the central government may,
by notification in the official gazette, specify
in this behalf. |
| |
Comments
(i) The court can take action -
(a) On motion by the advocate-general himself; or
(b) On motion by anyone with the consent of the
advocate-general; or
(c) On report by a subordinate court, in cases not
covered by section 14 of the Act.
(ii) Procedure of making a reference cannot apply
in a case when the presiding officer of a subordinate
court himself is guilty of contempt of court; Berely
v Xavier, 1988 Cr LJ 90.
(iii) It is always open the high court to take action
suo motu in respect of a subordinate court; state
of Orissa v R N Patra, 1976 Cr LJ 440 (Ori); see
also A R Rao, 1981 Cr LJ 1322.
(iv) Absolute discretion is rested in the advocate-general
in the matter of according consent; N Venkataramanappa
v D K Naikar, AIR 1975 Kant 57.
(v) Nobody has a right to compel the subordinate
court to make a reference to the high court; Jomon
v the state of Kerala, (1987) IJ Reports 273 (Kerala).
(vi) A negative fact cannot be proved; V K Kanade
v Mandho Godkari, (1990) I Mah LR 544 (Bom).
(vii) Contemner has no right to produce defence
to establish the truth of his allegations; In re:
K L Gauba, AIR 1942 Lah 105; see also In re: Ram
Mohanlal, AIR 1935 All 38. |
16.
Contempt by judge, magistrate or other person acting
judicially - (1) Subject to the provisions of
any law for the time being in force, a judge, magistrate
or other persons act in 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, so far
as may be, apply accordingly.
(2) Notwithstanding in this section shall apply
to any observations or remarks made by a judge,
magistrate or other person act in judicially, regarding
a subordinate court in an appeal or revision pending
before such judge, magistrate or other person against
the order or judgement of the subordinate court. |
| |
Comments
(i) Only a judge of a subordinate court can be said
to have committed contempt of his own court i.e.
the court in which such judge is presiding; Harish
Chandra v S Ali Ahmed, 1987 Cr LJ 320 (Pat).
(ii) A judge can foul judicial administration by
misdemeanors while engaged in the exercise of the
functions of a judge; Baradakanta v the registrar,
Orissa high court, AIR 1974 SC 710.
(iii) The magistrates should be conscious of their
heavy responsibilities and should not act in a manner
prejudicial to the litigants; B N Choudhary v S
M Singh, 1967 Cr LJ 1141 (Pat).
(iv) When the president officer of a subordinate
court is guilty of contempt of court, procedure
of making a reference cannot apply under section
15 of the Act; Berely v Xavier, 1988 Cr LJ 90. |
17.
Procedure after cognisance - (1) Notice of every
proceeding under section 15 shall be served personally
on the person charged, unless the court for reasons
to be recorded directs otherwise.
(2) The notice shall be accompanied - |
| |
(a)
In the case of proceedings commenced on a motion,
by a copy of the motion as also copies of the affidavits,
if any, on which such motion is founded and,
(b) In case of proceedings commenced on a reference
by a subordinate court, by a copy of the reference. |
(3)
The court may, if it is satisfied that a person
charged under Section 15 is likely to abscond or
keep out of the way to avoid service of the notice,
order the attachment of his property of such value
or amount as it may deem reasonable.
(4) Every attachment under sub section (3) shall
be effected in the manner provided in the code of
civil procedure, 1908 [5 of 1908 (Note: now see
code of criminal procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)], for
the attachment of property in execution of a decree
for payment of money, and if, after such attachment,
the person charged appears and shows to the satisfaction
of the court that he did not abscond or keep out
of the way to avoid service of the notice, the court
shall order the release of his property from attachment
upon such terms as to costs or otherwise as it may
think fit.
(5) Any person charged with contempt under Section
15 may file an affidavit in support of this defence,
and the court may determine the matter of the charge
either on the affidavits filed or after taking such
further evidence as may be necessary, and pass such
order as the justice of the case requires. |
| |
Comments
(i) The period of one year has to be reckoned from
the date on which a notice under this section has
been issued; K K R Nair v Mohan Das, 1990 Cr LJ
1641 (AP).
(ii) An order initiating proceeding for contempt
by a notice issued under section 17 is not appealable
under section 19 of the Act; the union of India
v Mario Coural Sa. AIR 1982 SC 691.
(iii) Committal for contempt is always discretionary
with the court; S C Nandy v G M Bhattacharjee, AIR
1951 Cal 507.
(iv) The position of a contemner is that of an accused
person; M R Parashar v Dr Farooq Abdullah 1984 Cal
LJ 337 (SC).
(v) Contempt proceedings are quasi criminal in nature;
Sheoraj v A P Batra, AIR 1955 All 638.
(vi) Benefit of doubt is available to an accused;
state of Orissa v Nityanandda Mohopatra, AIR 1960
Ori 132.
(vii) Personal appearance, unless dispensed with,
of a contemner is mandatory; B N Jaisimha v N T
Prabhakar, (1985) 29 MLJC Crl 640.
|
18.
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.
(2) Sub section (1) shall not apply to the court
of a judicial commissioner. |
| |
Comments
(i) The jurisdiction rests exclusively with a bench
of not less than two judges of the high court; B
R Karandikar v M Y Joshy, (1983) 2 Bom Cr 558 (Bom).
(ii) However, it was observed that a single judge
can also deal with criminal contempts committed
in facie curium; In re: court on its own motion,
AIR 1980 P & H 72. |
| 19.
Appeals - (1) An appeal shall lie as of right
from any order to 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.
Provided that where the order or decision is that
of the court of the judicial commissioner in any
union territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme
Court. |
| 2)
Pending any appeal. The appellate court may order
that - |
| |
(a)
The execution of the punishment or order appealed
against be suspended
(b) If the appellant is in confinement, he be released
on bail, and
(c) The appeal be heard notwithstanding that the
appellant has not purged his contempt. |
(3)
Where any person aggrieved by any order against
which an appeal may be filed satisfied the high
court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the high
court may also exercise all or any of the powers
conferred by sub section (2).
(4) An appeal under sub section (1) shall be filed- |
| |
(a)
In the case of an appeal to a bench of the high
court, within 30 days.
(b) In the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court,
within 60 days, from the date of the order appealed
against. |
| |
Comments
(a) When thee high court acquits the contemner,
no appeal lies; Subhash Chandra v B R Kakkar, (1992)
2 Punj Lr 46 (P & H).
(ii) If the order of committal for contempt of court
is made -
(b) By a single judge of the high court, an appeal
lies to a division bench thereof; or
(c) By a division bench of the high court, an appeal
lies to the Supreme Court, as of a statutory right;
Mohammad Idris v R J Babuji, (1984) 2 Crimes 880
(SC).
(iii) It is not each and every order passed during
the contempt proceedings that is appealable; S P
Wahi v Surendra Singh, 1983 Cr LJ 1426.
(iv) An appeal does not automatically operate as
a stay of the order appealed against; Hans Raj v
state of Himachal Pradesh, 1985 Cr LJ 1030. |
| 20.
Limitation for actions for contempt - No court
shall initiate any proceedings if contempt, either
on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry
of a period of one year from the date on which the
contempt is alleged to have been committed. |
| |
Comments
(i) Initiation of any proceedings for contempt is
barred after the expiry of a period of one year
from the date on which the contempt is alleged to
have been committed; V M Kanade v Madhao Gadkari,
(1990) 1 Mah LR 544 (Bom).
(ii) No intervening event or order stops the running
of time specified in this section; Golcha Avertising
Agency v the state of Maharashtra, (1990) 2 Bom
CR 262 (Bom).
(iii) The expression 'court' denotes a high court
or the Supreme Court; the state of Bihar v Ambika
Roy, 1991 Cr LJ 82 (Pat).
(iv) The provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963
do not apply; Krishnalal Chhoteylal, (1987) 13 ALR
44.
(v) Delay in initiating contempt proceedings cannot
be condoned; T M A Abdul Hamed v S Radhakrishnan,
1989 LW (Crl) 237. |
| 21.
Act not to apply to nyaya panchayatas or other village
courts - Nothing contained in this Act shall
apply in relation to contempt of nyaya panchayats
or other village courts, by whatever name known,
for the administration of justice, established under
any law. |
| 22.
Act to be in addition to, and not in derogation
of, other laws relating to contempt - The provisions
of this Act shall be in addition to, and not in
derogation of the provision of any other law relating
to contempt of courts. |
| |
Comments
The provisions incorporated in the Act are supplemented
to already existing law of contempt; Harish Chandra
Misra v S Ali Ahmed, AIR 1986 Pat 65. |
| 23.
Power of the Supreme Court and high court to make
rules - The Supreme Court or, a case may be,
any high court, may make rules, not inconsistent
with the provisions of this Act, providing for any
matter relating to its procedure. |
| |
Comments
The court is guided by its own procedure to be followed
in the facts and circumstances of each individual
case and to see that the condemner is getting full
opportunity to make his defence; Mohammed Vamin
v O P Bansal, 1982 Cr LJ 322 (Raj). |
| 24.
Repeal - The Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 (32
of 1952) is hereby repealed. |
| |
Comments
(i) This section repealed the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1952 (32 of 1952) with effect from 24-12-1991
which had already repealed the Contempt to Courts
Act, 1926 (XII of 1926 w.e.f. 14-3-1952
(ii) For contempts committed prior to this Act,
action could be taken under the Repealed Act (32
of 1952); see Ramniklal Nanalal v.Shah Pranlal Nahchand,
AIR 1952 Kutch 74. |
| Rules
to regulate proceedings for contempt to the Supreme
Court, 1975 G.S.R. 142 - In exercise of the
powers under section 23 of the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1971 read with article 145 of the Constitution
of India and all other powers enabling it in this
behalf, the Supreme Court hereby makes, with the
approval of the President, the following rules -
|
| |
1.
(1) These rules may be called the rules to regulate
proceedings for contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their
publication in the official gazette (Note: published
in the gazette of India, dated February 1, 1975
and came into force from that date.
2. (1) Where contempt is committed in view or presence
or hearing of the court, the contemnor may be punished
by the court before which it is committed either
forthwith or on such date as may be appointed by
the court in that behalf.
(2) Pending the determination of the charge, the
court may direct that the contemnor shall be detained
in such custody as it may specify.
Provided that the contemnor may be released on bail
on such terms as the court may direct.
3. In case of contempt other than the contempt referred
to in rule 2, the court may take action. |
| |
|
(a)
Suo motu, or
(b) On a petition made by attorney general, or solicitor
general, or
(c) On a petition made by any person, and in the
case of a criminal contempt with the consent in
writing of the attorney general or the solicitor
general. |
| |
4.
(a) Every petition under Rule 3 (b) or (c) shall
contain: |
| |
|
(i)
The name, description and place of residence of
the petitioner or petitioners and of the persons
charged.
(ii) Nature of the contempt alleged, and such material
facts, including the date or dates of commission
of the alleged contempt, as may be necessary for
the proper determination of the case.
(iii) If a petition has previously been made by
him on the same facts, the petitioners shall give
the details of the petition previously made and
shall also indicate the result thereof. |
| |
(b)
The petition shall be supported by an affidavit.
(c) Whether the petitioner relies upon a document
or documents in his possession or power, he shall
file such document or documents or true copies thereof
with the petition.
(d) No court-fee shall be payable on the petition,
and on any documents filed in the proceedings. |
| |
5.
Every petition under rule 3 (b) and (c) shall be
posted before the court for preliminary hearing
and for orders as to issue of notice. Upon such
hearing, the court, if satisfied that no prima facie
case has been made out for issue of notice, may
dismiss the petition, and, if not so satisfied direct
that notice of the petition be issued to the contemnor.
6. (1) Notice to the person charged shall be in
Form 1. The person charged shall, unless otherwise
ordered, appear in person before the court a directed
on the date fixed for hearing of the proceeding,
and shall continue to remain present during hearing
till the proceeding is finally disposed of by order
of the court
(2) When action is instituted on petition, a copy
of the petition along with the annexure and affidavits
shall be served upon the person charged.
7. The person charged may file his reply duly supported
by an affidavit or affidavits.
8. No further affidavit or document shall be filed
except with the leave of the court.
9. Unless otherwise ordered by the court, seven
copies of the paper book shall be prepared in the
registry, one for the petitioner, one for the opposite
party and the remaining for the use of the court.
The paper book in case shall be prepared at the
expense of the central government and shall consist
of the following documents: |
| |
|
(i)
Petition and affidavits filed by the petitioner,
(ii) A copy of, or a statement relating to, the
objectionable matter constituting the alleged contempt.
(iii) Replay and affidavits of the parties.
(iv) Documents filed by the parties.
(v) Any other document which the registrar may deem
fit to include. |
| |
10.
The court may direct the attorney-general or solicitor-general
to appear and assist the court.
11. (1) The court may, if it has reason to believe,
that the person charged is absconding or is otherwise
evading service of notice, or if he fails to appear
in person or to continue to remain present in person
in pursuance of the notice, direct a warrant bailable
or non-bailable for his arrest, addressed to one
or more police officers or may order attachment
of property. The warrant shall be issued under the
signature of the registrar. The warrant shall be
in Form II and shall be executed, as far as may
be in the manner provided for execution of warrants
under the code of criminal procedure.
(2) The warrant shall be execute by the officer
to officers to whom it is directed, and may also
be executed by any other police officer whose name
is endorsed upon the warrant by the officer to whom
it is directed or endorsed.
(3) Where a warrant is to be executed outside the
union territory of Delhi, the court may instead
of directing such warrant to police officer, forward
it to the magistrate of the district or the superintendent
of police or commissioner of police of the district
within which the person charged is believed to be
residing. The magistrate or the police officer to
whom the warrant is forwarded shall endorse his
name thereon, and cause it to be executed.
(4) Every person who is arrested and detained shall
be produced before the nearest magistrate within
a period of 24 hours of such arrest excluding the
time necessary for the from the place of arrest
to the court of the magistrate, and no such person
shall be detained in custody beyond the said period
without the authority of a magistrate. |
| |
12.
The court may, either suo motu, or on motion made
for that purpose, order the attendance for cross-examination,
for a person whose affidavit has been filed in the
matter.
| | | |
