Editorial

Source: Times of India

Introduction

Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, in an interview, explained that the authority of constitutional courts to take action for contempt is meant to ensure the smooth functioning of the courts, not to shield judges from criticism. The Constitution grants authority to the Supreme Court and high courts through Articles 129 and 215 to penalize contempt, with the operational procedures outlined in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (Act of 1971).

What is Contempt of Court?

• Contempt of court is a legal concept that seeks to protect the dignity and authority of the judicial system.
• In India, contempt of court is addressed under the Act of 1971, which defines and prescribes punishment for contemptuous actions.
• The primary objective is to maintain the sanctity of the judicial process, ensuring that the judiciary's authority is respected and upheld.
• However, the interpretation and application of contempt laws often raise concerns about potential infringement on freedom of expression, leading to a delicate balance that must be maintained.

What are the Types of Contempt of Court?

• Contempt of court in India can be broadly categorized into two types: civil contempt and criminal contempt.
• Under Section 2(b) of the Act of 1971, Civil contempt refers to willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, or other processes of a court, whereas criminal contempt involves actions that scandalize or tend to scandalize, or lower or tend to lower the authority of any court.
• Under Section 2(c) of the Act of 1971 “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;

What are the Defences Available in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971?

• Innocent Publication: Under Section 3 if the persons so publishing had at the time of its publication no reasonable grounds for believing that the proceeding was pending, the publication is described as “innocent”.
• Fair and Accurate Report of Judicial Proceeding: Under Section 4 a person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding or any stage thereof.
• Fair Criticism: Under Section 5 it is the privileged right of the Indian citizen to believe what he considers to be true and to speak out his mind.
• Complaint Against Presiding Officer: Under Section 6 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 of any subordinate court.
• Truth as a Defence: Section 13 enables the Court to permit justification by truth as a valid defence in any contempt proceedings if it is public interest or bona fide.
• Apology: Proviso to Section 12(1) says that the accused may be discharged, or the punishment awarded may be remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the Court.

What is the Current Scenario of Contempt of Court?

• In April 2018, a report from the Law Commission revealed that high courts had 568 pending criminal contempt cases and 96,310 civil cases.
• On April 10, 2018, the Supreme Court had 683 civil contempt cases and 15 criminal contempt cases awaiting resolution.

Conclusion

The Act of 1971 requires careful scrutiny and, if necessary, reform to address the ambiguities and concerns that have been raised over the years. The judiciary's commitment to upholding the principles of democracy, including freedom of expression, will be crucial in navigating the delicate equilibrium between protecting the court's authority and preserving citizens' rights in the years to come.