The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
🔹 Background and Purpose
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was enacted to define and regulate the law relating to contempt of courts in India. The Act clarifies the powers of courts to punish contempt and lays down procedural safeguards to ensure fair trial and prevent abuse of these powers.
Before this Act, the law of contempt was largely based on English common law and judicial precedents. The Act provides a statutory basis, defining types of contempt, exceptions, and procedures.
The Act aims to balance respect for the judiciary with freedom of speech and expression, ensuring the dignity of courts while protecting citizens' rights.
🔹 Objectives of the Act
To define what constitutes contempt of court.
To empower courts to punish contempts to uphold judicial authority and dignity.
To specify procedures and safeguards for contempt proceedings.
To clarify exceptions where criticism of the judiciary is allowed.
To regulate civil and criminal contempt.
🔹 Key Definitions (Section 2)
Contempt of Court: The act of disrespect, disobedience, or interference with the administration of justice.
Divided into two main types:
Civil Contempt: Willful disobedience of any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ, or other process of a court, or willful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
Criminal Contempt: Publication or act that scandalizes or lowers the authority of any court, prejudices or interferes with judicial proceedings, or obstructs the administration of justice.
🔹 Types of Contempt
1. Civil Contempt
Disobedience or wilful breach of court orders or undertakings.
Example: Refusing to pay court-ordered maintenance.
2. Criminal Contempt
Acts or publications that:
Scandalize the court.
Prejudice judicial proceedings.
Obstruct justice.
Example: Publishing defamatory remarks about judges or judicial processes.
🔹 Key Provisions of the Act
1. Jurisdiction and Powers (Sections 10 & 15)
Supreme Court and High Courts have the power to punish contempt of their own courts.
Subordinate courts have limited contempt powers.
The court may impose fine, imprisonment, or both.
2. Procedure for Contempt (Section 13)
Contempt proceedings are summary in nature but courts must follow natural justice.
Notice to the accused and an opportunity to be heard must be given.
Proceedings can be initiated suo motu or on a complaint.
3. Exceptions and Defenses (Section 13)
Truth as a defense: The truth of the alleged contemptuous matter may be a valid defense if it is in public interest and was made with an honest belief.
Fair and bona fide criticism of judicial acts is allowed.
Fair reporting of judicial proceedings is exempted.
Proceedings that are pending in court are protected from contempt charges if fair reporting is done.
4. Power to Punish for Contempt (Section 12)
Courts can punish for contempt committed in their presence or otherwise.
5. Constitutional Safeguards
The Act protects the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) but permits reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) to uphold the dignity of courts.
🧑⚖️ Relevant Case Law
1. R. vs. Gray (1913) (English Law Precedent)
Defined the "scandalizing the court" form of contempt, influencing Indian law.
2. In Re: Arundhati Roy (2002)
Arundhati Roy was found guilty of criminal contempt for alleging that the Supreme Court was biased.
The Court held that allegations that scandalize or lower the authority of the court constitute contempt.
3. K.K. Verma vs. Union of India (1970)
Held that truth can be a defense if it is in the public interest and made with honest intention.
The Court emphasized the balance between contempt and freedom of speech.
4. Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2012)
The Supreme Court initiated contempt proceedings against Sahara for failure to comply with court orders.
Demonstrated the power of courts to enforce their decrees through contempt.
5. Romesh Thappar vs. State of Madras (1950)
While predating the Act, this landmark case emphasized freedom of speech but acknowledged reasonable restrictions, influencing contempt jurisprudence.
🔹 Summary Table
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Year Enacted | 1971 |
| Types of Contempt | Civil and Criminal |
| Punishment | Fine, imprisonment, or both |
| Defenses | Truth (public interest), fair criticism, fair reporting |
| Courts with Power | Supreme Court, High Courts primarily |
| Procedure | Summary but with natural justice safeguards |
| Key Cases | Arundhati Roy (2002), K.K. Verma (1970), Sahara (2012) |
📝 Importance of the Act
Protects the authority and dignity of the judiciary.
Ensures uninterrupted administration of justice.
Balances judicial respect with freedom of speech.
Prevents misuse of contempt powers by laying down clear procedures and safeguards.
RELATED Blog
0 comments