Understanding the Legal Framework and Constitutional Basis of Contempt of Court in India
The article explains the concept of 'contempt of court' in India, rooted in Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution, which designate the Supreme Court and High Courts as 'courts of record.' The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, classifies contempt into civil (willful disobedience) and criminal (scandalizing the court). While fair criticism of a decided case is not contempt, comments that interfere with the administration of justice or lower the court's authority are punishable. The power to punish for contempt is inherent to these courts to ensure the sanctity of the judicial process and constitutional morality.
Key Points
- Article 129 (Supreme Court) and Article 215 (High Courts) empower these institutions to punish for contempt of themselves.
- Civil contempt involves willful disobedience of any judgment or decree, while criminal contempt involves scandalizing or lowering the authority of the court.
- The Attorney General or Advocate General's consent is typically required for a third party to initiate criminal contempt proceedings in the Supreme Court or High Court.
- Fair criticism of a judgment is a settled principle and does not constitute contempt unless it transgresses the limits of fair commentary.
Exam Facts
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 provides the statutory definition and classification of contempt.
- Article 19(2) of the Constitution allows reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech in relation to contempt of court.
- Landmark case: M. V. Jayarajan versus High Court of Kerala (2015) upheld contempt for abusive language in public speech.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.