Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Contempt of Court: Satya Prakash Adjunct Faculty Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA

    Uploaded by

    mansavi bihani
    261 views8 pages
    The document discusses the role of courts and the judiciary in dispute resolution and maintaining stability. It defines civil and criminal contempt of court under Indian law. It summarizes a recent case where the Supreme Court held activist Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for tweets criticizing the judiciary. While the court was legally correct, it is argued that showing more restraint and magnanimity would have enhanced the court's credibility given concerns over the broad scope of contempt laws and lack of natural justice safeguards when judges are the aggrieved parties. Contempt is a matter of policy for courts to balance free speech and judicial authority. The Spycatcher case is cited where UK judges ignored similar criticism to maintain their credibility.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Contempt of Courts

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document discusses the role of courts and the judiciary in dispute resolution and maintaining stability. It defines civil and criminal contempt of court under Indian law. It summarizes a recent case where the Supreme Court held activist Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for tweets criticizing the judiciary. While the court was legally correct, it is argued that showing more restraint and magnanimity would have enhanced the court's credibility given concerns over the broad scope of contempt laws and lack of natural justice safeguards when judges are the aggrieved parties. Contempt is a matter of policy for courts to balance free speech and judicial authority. The Spycatcher case is cited where UK judges ignored similar criticism to maintain their credibility.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    261 views8 pages

    Contempt of Court: Satya Prakash Adjunct Faculty Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA

    Uploaded by

    mansavi bihani
    The document discusses the role of courts and the judiciary in dispute resolution and maintaining stability. It defines civil and criminal contempt of court under Indian law. It summarizes a recent case where the Supreme Court held activist Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for tweets criticizing the judiciary. While the court was legally correct, it is argued that showing more restraint and magnanimity would have enhanced the court's credibility given concerns over the broad scope of contempt laws and lack of natural justice safeguards when judges are the aggrieved parties. Contempt is a matter of policy for courts to balance free speech and judicial authority. The Spycatcher case is cited where UK judges ignored similar criticism to maintain their credibility.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 8

    CONTEMPT OF COURT

    SATYA PRAKASH
    ADJUNCT FACULTY
    Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA
    Role of Judiciary and Courts
     Courts play a very important role in adjudication of disputes in any
    constitutional set-up.
     Be it a dispute between two or more individual or citizens’ dispute with
    the State, without there being courts, dispute resolution would not be
    possible.
     Generally, people have faith in judges, courts and the judicial system
    which provides stability to the entire political system as people have
    confidence that they can approach courts, if wronged.
     If people lose faith in the judiciary, there is a possibility that they might
    take the law into their own hands.
     This can lead to vigilantism and push a country towards anarchy and
    chaos.
     It’s for these reasons that any act that tends to diminish people’s faith in
    the judiciary is categorized as contempt of court and made punishable.
    CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
     Article 129 of the Constitution says, “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.”
     Article 142(2) of the Constitution reads, “Subject to the provisions of
    any law made in this behalf by Parliament, the Supreme Court shall,
    as respects the whole of the territory of India, have all and every
    power to make any order for the purpose of securing the attendance
    of any person, the discovery or production of any documents, or the
    investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.”
     Article 215 of the Constitution says, “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.”
    DEFINITION OF CIVIL CONTEMPT OF COURT

     Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 says, “Contempt of


    court” means civil contempt or criminal contempt.
     Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 says, “Civil
    contempt” means wilful disobedience to any judgement, decree,
    direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of
    an undertaking given to a court.
     Civil Contempt has two key expressions:
    wilful disobedience to a judgement, decree, direction, order, writ or
    other process of a court; or
    wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court
    DEFINITION OF CRININAL CONTEMPT OF COURT

     Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 says, “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) Scandalizes or tends to scandalize, 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.
    PRASHANT BHUSHAN’S CASE: CRITICISM
     The Supreme Court’s decision holding activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt of court for his “scandalous” tweets has
    once again highlighted the problem of the contempt law’s incompatibility – actual or perceived – with a democratic society in
    which every institution and individuals manning public offices must be subjected to public criticism. Coming on the eve of
    Independence Day, it was difficult to appreciate the verdict.
     The can’t be any quarrel with the power of contempt per se as it’s aimed at maintaining public confidence in the judiciary so as to
    safeguard the interests of the common man which would be adversely affected, if the court’s authority is undermined.
     But the provisions of contempt law and the manner in which the contempt jurisdiction is exercised by courts – both have
    perceptible problems with immense scope for improvement.
      First, the definition of criminal contempt under section 2(c)(i) of the contempt of Courts Act is vague and expansive that makes it
    an offence to publish anything - in any manner whatsoever - which “scandalises or tends to scandalise or lowers or tends to lower
    the authority of, any court.” The expression “tends to” can potentially bring anything within the ambit of criminal contempt. No
    wonder the UK did away with this form of contempt of court in 2013.
     Second, it’s one of the rare category of cases in which principles of natural justice don’t apply. Judges hear cases despite being
    aggrieved persons – either individually or as a member of the institution. There is no visible tool to rule out possible bias, except
    their own sense of fairness, justice and good conscience. It calls for greater self-restraint and unless there is a direct interference
    with due course of judicial proceedings or obstruction in the administration of justice, courts should avoid invoking contempt
    jurisdiction.
     Third, going by the interpretation of the existing provisions of the contempt law, the court may be right in concluding that
    Bhushan’s tweets were “a malicious, scurrilous, calculated attack on the very foundation of the institution of the judiciary…”
     But while upholding the letters of law, the appears to have missed its spirit. It could have followed the House of Lords which spared
    Daily Mirror that had published an upside-down picture of three law lords with the caption, ‘You Old Fools’, saying whether one was
    a fool or not was a matter of perception. Showing magnanimity was a far better option as it would have enhanced the court’s
    credibility.
     The judiciary plays a vital role in strengthening democracy in India. Barring a few exceptions, courts have zealously protected
    individual freedoms from legislative and executive excesses. They need to be circumspect while using the contempt jurisdiction in
    a manner that can have a chilling effect on free speech, particularly where the person happens to be a known crusader for civil
    liberties.
    CONTEMPT A MATTER OF POLICY FOR COURTS

     Contempt against bureaucrats


     Contempt against politicians
     Contempt against activists
     Contempt against journalists
     Contempt against common man
     Contempt against judges
    SPYCATCHER CASE (1987)

     In the Spycatcher case (UK) the judges chose to ignore comments such as


    “YOU FOOLS” published by a newspaper.

    You might also like