Contempt of Court
Click here to load reader
-
Upload
kiran-mishra -
Category
Documents
-
view
348 -
download
30
description
Transcript of Contempt of Court
WINTERTemplate
By:KIRAN MISHRABBA. LLB, Div- “B”Roll no.- 23
• Contempt of court is behavior that opposes or defies the
authority, justice, and dignity of the court.
•The House of Lords in Attorney General v. Times Newspapers
Ltd., has rightly enumerated threefold purposes of the law of
contempt:
a.To enable the parties to litigation and the witnesses to come
before the Court without outside interference;
b.To enable the Courts to try cases without such interference;
c.To ensure that authority and administration of law are
maintained.
•TYPES: (A) CIVIL CONTEMPT
(B) CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
•Civil contempt generally involves the failure to perform an act
that is ordered by a court as a means to enforce the rights of
individuals or to secure remedies for parties in a civil action.
MD. IKRAM HUSSAIN V. STATE of U.P
•Criminal contempt involves behavior that assaults the dignity
of the court or impairs the ability of the court to conduct its
work.
STATE OF A.P vs. PRAKASH RAO
•Article 19(1) (a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression while
Article 19(2) empowers the Central government to impose restrictions
on this freedom, one of the grounds for restriction being that of
contempt.
•Another limit- Articles 129 and 215 that gives the power of contempt
to the High Courts of the states and the Supreme Court.
•The basis of contempt law is that in order to ensure the independence
of the judiciary, powers need to be vested in it to implement its
decisions and carry on its duties without fear or fervor.
•As Justice Markandey Katju noted, “In a democracy, the purpose of the
contempt power can only be to enable the court to function. The power
is not to prevent the master (the people) from criticizing the servant (the
judge) if the latter does not function properly or commits misconduct.”
Art. 129, Supreme Court to be a court of record: The Supreme Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.
•Meaning of “a court of record”•A court of record has-a.Power to determine its own jurisdiction, and b.It has power to punish for its contempt
•Delhi Judicial Service Association vs. State of Gujarat•In re: Vinay Chandra Mishra•Mohd. Aslam vs. Union of India
•CONTEMT OF SUB-ORDINATE COURT: expansive interpretation to Article 129.
•PUNISHMENT FOR CONTEMPT: Simple imprisonment not extending beyond six months, or a fine which may extend to Rs 2000/- or both.
WINTERTemplate
Article 215 of the Constitution of India states “Every High Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.”
•High Court: A court of record•Besides, High Court has twofold powers:a.It has the power to determine the question about its own jurisdiction; b.It has inherent power to punish for its contempt summarily.
•In Sukhdev v. Teja Singh, the Supreme Court refused to transfer contempt proceedings filed against the petitioner in the Pepsu High Court to some other High Court. The Constitution vests in the High Court itself to deal with its contempt and therefore, transfer of contempt proceedings from the Pepsu to another High Court would deprive the High Court of the jurisdiction vested in it by the constitution.
•The Supreme Court has ruled that under Art.129, it has jurisdiction to take cognizance of the contempt of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal which performs judicial functions and is subordinate to the High Court.
•The Court can take suo motu cognizance of the contempt of the Tribunal.
•In Income-tax Appellate Tribunal v. V.K. Agarwal, the Court characterized the letter by the Secretary, Ministry of Law “as an attempt to affect the decision making” and “a clear threat to their independent functioning.
Thus, the secretary was held guilty of committing contempt of the Tribunal as he questioned the of the members of the Tribunal in deciding a specific case and asked them to explain the judicial order which they had passed.
•In Hira Lal Dixit v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court observed that it is not necessary that there should be an actual interference with the course of administration of justice. It is enough if the offending act or publication tends in way to so interfere.
•In Arundhati Roy, In re, it was observed that even when criminal contempt was found established and the contemnor had ‘not shown any repentance or regret or remorse', a “symbolic” punishment of imprisonment for one day and fine of Rs. 2000/- was imposed “keeping in mind that the respondent was a woman”.
•In Amrit Nahata v. Union of India, the Court ruled that a contempt petition cannot be withdrawn by the petitioner as a matter of right. The matter is primarily between the Court and the contemnor. It is, therefore, the Court to allow or refuse withdrawal in the light of the broad facts of the case.
•Reasons for the uncertainty in the law of contempt
a)No certain definition of contempt in Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
b)No definition of what constitutes scandalizing the court or what
prejudices, or interferes with the course of justice.
•The contempt power in a democracy is only to enable the court to
function effectively, and not to protect the self –esteem of an individual
judge.
•It can be adequately inferred that the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is
of paramount importance in the context of sustaining the concept of
justice. It aides to make the process of administering justice
expeditious as well as upholds the dignity and faith the people have
bestowed in the judicial system of the country.