INTRODUCTION

1. INTRODUCTION TO THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 came into existence on 24th December, 1971. The concept of contempt of courts finds its traces in the English law. The primary objective of the Act was to define the powers of certain courts, namely the High Courts and the Supreme Court of India, with respect to punishment against contempt of court and to regulate the procedures associated with it. The Act is also meant to ensure that the Courts do not exceed their jurisdiction while exercising their contempt powers beyond upholding the majesty of the judicial system. 

1.  What does contempt of court mean? 

Contempt of court can be perceived as an act of disrespect or disobedience toward a Court or interference with its routine procedures relating to administration of justice. Some of the examples include disobeying a court order, disrupting court proceedings, destroying evidence, etc. Therefore, contempt of court encompasses behaviour both inside and outside of the court.  

Lord Diplock, in his judgement in the case of Attorney General v. Times Newspaper Ltd1, propounded the following 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.” 

2.  Definition of ‘contempt of court’ under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 

Section 2(a) of the Act defines contempt of court as follows: - 

“(a) “contempt of court” means civil contempt or criminal contempt” 

From this definition, we can infer that the Act recognises two different types of contempt, namely, civil and criminal. Their definitions are given in sub-clauses (b) and (c) of Section 2 of the Act, respectively: - 

“(b) “civil contempt” means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful 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 representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which— 

1. scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or 

2. prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or 

3.  interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.” 

The Supreme Court has, through its various judgements, reiterated that the Courts exercise their contempt powers to punish acts that tend to interfere with the court of administration of justice. The apex court in Pritam Pal v. High Court of Madhya Pradesh2 has held the following, inter alia, “constitute contempt of court: 

• Insinuations derogatory to the dignity of the court which are calculated to undermine the confidence of the people in the integrity of the Judges. 

• An attempt by one party to prejudice the court against the other party to the action. 

• To stir up public feelings on the question pending for decision before court and to try to influence the Judge in favour of himself. 

• An attempt to affect the minds of the Judges and to deflect them from performing their duty by flattery or veiled threat. 

• An act or publication which scandalises the court attributing dishonesty to a Judge in the discharge of his functions. 

• Wilful disobedience or non-compliance of the court’s order.” 

3.  Constitutional backing of contempt of court 

Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India provide that the Supreme Court and every High Court, respectively, shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such court including to punish for its contempt. The term ‘Court of Record’ means a Court whose judgements and proceedings are stored for perpetual memory. These records possess evidentiary value and their veracity cannot be questions when produced before a court of law. Any statement made in contradiction of such records may be brought under the ambit of contempt of court. 

    Another reference to contempt of court can be found in Article 142 of the Constitution of India which talks about enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court. Article 142(2) guarantees the apex court certain powers including that of punishing anyone for its contempt. 

4.  Essentials of contempt of court 

The essential components of contempt of court can be briefly explained as follows: 

•  The court has to make a valid order and the contemnor (respondent) should have knowledge of this order. 

• The action of contemnor should be deliberate and be in clear disregard of the order of the court. 

• In cases of civil contempt, the contemnor should display wilful disobedience to any type of court proceedings, its orders, judgements, decrees, etc. 

• In cases of criminal contempt, ‘publication’ is the most important ingredient to establish contempt. Publication can be either spoken or written, or by words, signs or visible representation. 

2. DEFENCES TO CONTEMPT OF COURT 

Since the commission of contempt of court entails penal consequences, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 provides safeguards for persons facing contempt proceedings. These defences can be found in Sections 3 to 8, as well as, Section 13 of the Act. These can be categorized into defences for civil and criminal contempt.  

1.  Section 13 of the Act: is of much significance as it was added via an amendment in 2006. Clause (a) of this Section prohibits the courts from passing a sentence under this Act unless it is satisfied that that the contempt is of a nature that it substantially interferes or has the tendency to do so with the due course of justice. Clause (b) of the Section further goes on to recognise ‘justification by truth’ as a valid defence in contempt proceedings provided that it is in public interest and the request to exercise this defence is made bonafidely.  

2.  Defences in civil contempt are listed below: 

3. No knowledge of the order: The general principle is that a person cannot be held guilty of contempt in respect of an order of which he claims to be unaware. For example, if the court passes an order directing the party to perform a task within the stipulated time but the order is served to the concerned party after the expiry of the specified time, then the party cannot be charged with contempt of court against non-compliance of the court order. However, deliberate evasion of a court order even after being aware of the same, will result in contempt proceedings. 

4. Disobedience or breach of the undertaking was not wilful: This defence can be adopted when a party can prove that there was no wilful disobedience or breach of a court order. The Court may assess the intention of the party by comparing his actions with the same act being performed in the same way by a reasonable and a prudent man in the given circumstances. 

5. The order has been passed by a court lacking jurisdiction: If a court passes an order in contempt proceedings does so without having jurisdiction, any disobedience or breach of such an order will not amount to contempt since the order passed by such court lacking jurisdiction is void and not binding on the parties. The burden to prove that the court which has passed the order had no jurisdiction to pass, lies on the person who alleges it. 

6. The order involves more than one reasonable interpretation: If the order passed by a court in contempt proceedings has more than one reasonable interpretation and the respondent acts in accordance with one such reasonable interpretation, then he cannot be held liable for contempt of court. However, this defence is available only when a bona fide question of interpretation arises. In case of T.M.A. Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka3, it was held that this defence won’t be allowed if a doubt about the order has been deliberately created when actually there is no doubt at all. 

7. When compliance of the order is impossible: In proceedings for civil contempt, it would be a valid defence that the compliance of the order is impossible. However, the cases of impossibility must be distinguished from the cases of mere difficulty. In case of Amar Singh v. K.P. Geetakrishnan4, the court granted certain pensioner benefits to a large number of retired employees with effect from a particular back date. The plea of impossibility was taken on the ground that the implementation of the order would result in heavy financial burden on the exchequer. However, the plea of impossibility was rejected by the court with the observation that although it’s difficult to comply with the order but it’s not impossible to comply and therefore, it should be complied with. 

8.  Defences available in criminal contempt cases 

9. Innocent publication and distribution of matter: Section 3 of the Act provides for the following: 

• No reasonable ground for believing that proceedings were pending: If a contempt proceeding is initiated against a person on the ground that he is responsible for publication which prejudice or interferes or tends to interfere with the proceedings which is pending, he may plead that he at the time of publication has no reasonable grounds for believing that the proceeding was pending. 

• Proceeding not pending at the time of publication: Publication of any matter which interferes or tends to interfere with or obstructs or tends to obstruct with the course of justice in connection with any civil or criminal proceedings will not make the person responsible for such publication, liable for contempt of court if he proves that proceedings about which such publication has been made were not pending at the time of publication. 

• Innocent distribution of Publication: a person shall not be guilty of contempt on the ground that he has distributes a publication on ground that containing any matter which interferes or tends to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice in connection with any civil or criminal proceedings pending at the time of distribution if at the time of distribution, he had no reasonable ground for believing that it contained any such matter. 

2. Fair and accurate report of judicial proceeding: Section 4 of the Act provides person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing a fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings or any stage thereof. In E.T. Sen v. Narayanan and Others5,it has been held that while reproducing the court proceedings, no words may be added, omitted or substituted if their effect is to be more prejudicial to a party litigant than the actual proceedings. Any deviation in the report from the correct proceedings renders the alleged contemnor liable. 

3. Fair criticism of judicial act: Section 5 of the Act provides that 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.  

Conditions of fair comment- 

• It must be based on facts truly stated. No comment is fair if it is based on a mistake of fact. 

• Must not contain imputation of corrupt motives on the person whose conduct is criticized. 

• It must be an honest expression of the writer's real opinion. 

4. Complaint against presiding officers of subordinate courts: Section 6 of the Act provides that a person shall not be guilty made by him in good faith concerning a presiding officer of any subordinate court to any other subordinate court or High court to which it is subordinate. 

5. Publication of information relating to proceedings in chambers or in camera: Section 7 of the Act provides that this defence is generally available to persons except in certain situations. These exceptions are mentioned in Section 7(1)(a).   

6. Other defences not affected: Section 8 of the Act states other defences which would be applicable as valid defences in contempt proceedings will not cease to be available merely due to provisions of this Act.  

7. PROCEDURE FOLLOWED IN CASE OF CONTEMPT IN THE FACE OF COURT 

Two Sections of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 deals with the procedure of Contempt proceeding. One talks about the proceeding in the face of the court of records and other talks about the proceedings other than the court of records. 

1. Contempt in the face of the Supreme Court and High Court – Section 14 

This provision applies when a person appears to have committed contempt in in the presence or hearing, the court may cause such person to be detained in custody and shall at any time before the rising of court on the same day as early as possible, thereafter: 

1. Cause him to be informed in writing of the contempt with which he is charged. 

2. Allow him to make his defence in respect of the charge. 

3. After taking such evidence as may be offered by such person and after hearing him precede either forthwith or after adjournment to determine the matter of the charge. 

4. Make such order for the punishment or discharge of such person as may necessary. 

A contemnor may, while he is in custody during the pendency of the case, secure his release on bail upon furnishing bonds with or without sureties, and, on the promise that he shall continue to attend the court proceedings diligently.  

2.  Procedure of criminal contempt outside the court – Section 15 

Criminal contempt committed outside the court is also known as ‘constitutive contempt. This section deals with contempt apart from those which are referred in Section 14 of the Act.  Section 15(1) deals with cognizance of criminal contempt by courts of record, i.e., the High Courts and the Supreme Court, whereas Section 15(2) deals with criminal contempt of sub-ordinate courts, wherein the concerned High Court is authorized to take necessary action. 

Section 15 prevents private individuals to file in contempt proceedings without the consent of the Advocate General. In Hari Kishan vs. Narotam Dutt Shashtri6, the Himachal Pradesh High Court held that the purpose of barring private person from filing criminal contempt is to prevent the courts from being flooded with frivolous motions in order to serve personal interest or grudge. 

4. LIMITATION ON CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS  

The period of limitation in contempt proceedings as provided in Section 20 of the Act is one year from the date on which the alleged contempt was committed. This limitation is applicable to both civil and criminal contempt.  

In civil contempt cases, the period of limitation commences after the expiry of period mentioned in the order after service of certified copy of the order upon the other side. If the concerned court order remains silent on the time period, then it is expected that the party complies with the order within a reasonable period of time. The term “reasonable period” has been interpreted to be a period of three months from the date of service of certified copy.  

On the contrary, in criminal cases, the contempt is alleged to have been committed the moment scandalization of court or interference with the administration of justice occurs, immediately after which the period of limitation commences.  

Section 19 of the Act provides for the period of limitation with respect to filing an appeal. Section 19(4) states that an appeal should be filed within 30 days to the division bench of the High Court and, within 60 days in case the appeal is to be filed before the Supreme Court from the date of the order appealed against. 

5. POWER OF COURTS TO MAKE RULES REGARDING CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS  

Section 23 of the Act empowers the Courts of Record to make rules regarding contempt proceedings and reads as follow: - 

“The Supreme Court or, as the 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.” 

6. COURT FEE WITH RESPECT TO CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS  

The court fee table provided below is applicable before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.    

7. PUNISHMENT FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT 

Section 12 of the Act deals with the power of the Courts, namely the High Courts and the Supreme Court of India, to render sentences in contempt proceedings. Section 12(1) is the relevant provision in this regard which states that a person who has allegedly committed 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. Clause 2 of this section also imposes a limitation on the power of the courts by prohibiting such courts from imposing a sentence for contempt in excess of what is prescribed under Section 12(1) either in respect of itself or of a court subordinate to it. Section 12(3) grants power to the courts to sentence a person to detainment in a civil prison for a period not exceeding 6 months, if the court feels that a fine shall not meet the ends of justice. 

1.  Punishment in case of contempt committed by a company  

If the contempt of court has been committed by a company and it is provided that the contempt has been committed with the consent of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officers of the company, then such persons shall also be deemed to be guilty of the contempt and the punishment will be enforced against them by the detention in civil prison of such director, manager, secretary or other officer with the leave of the court. This is stated in Section 12(5) of the Act. 

8. REMEDIES AGAINST AN ORDER OF PUNISHMENT  

The following remedies are available to the contemnor against an order of punishment: 

1. Apology: Explanation to Section 12(1) has enabled the contemnor to put forward his defence while pleading apology. An apology should not be rejected on the ground that it is qualified or conditional if the accused makes it bona fide. It must be rendered at the earliest opportunity and not at the time when the court is going to announce its sentence.  In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India7, the hon'ble Supreme Court clarified that an apology should not be used as a weapon of defence in case of contempt.  

2. Appeal: Section 19 of the Act provides the right to appeal against any order or decision of the High Court while exercising its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. Powers of the appellate court are mentioned under Section 19(2) wherein it allows for the following orders to be passed during the pendency of the suit: - 

• The execution of the punishment order shall remain suspended 

• If the appellate is under confinement, he must be released on bail. 

• The appeal may be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not perched his contempt. 

Section 19(4) provides for the period of limitation for preferring an appeal. It provides that an appeal under Section 19(1) shall be filed within 30 days to the division bench of the High Court and in 60 days in case appeal lies in the Supreme Court from the date of the order appealed against.