Contempt Of Court - A Study

Akash Kumar, Research Scholar, Radha Govind University, Ramgarh, Jharkhand

Introduction

India gained its democracy and became an independent republic on 26th January 1950. It is since then, that India has its own common law system. The notion of contempt of court is defined in the “Contempt of court act, 1971”1. The act defines it as appalling or in any way try to lower the authority of the court. The case of contempt can even be brought up when a person tries to intervene or step in to the regular course of judicial proceedings. Another aspect on which the court can hold a person liable for the same, is when an individual in any way bars or tries to bar or in any way tends to hamper the judicial administration and the working of the court. The supreme court and the high courts derive its power of contempt from the constitution. Basically, contempt can be classified into two types, first is the “Civil contempt” which means a known delinquency to the judgement of the honourable court. Second in the “Criminal contempt”2, it further means if a person in any possible means of publication be it by words, spoken or written, by symbols or signs lower the authority of the court can be held for the same.

There is a very thin line of decree between a contempt and a healthy criticism. Thus, it is very important to differentiate between the both. The constitution gives us the right to freedom of speech but cautious and fair application is context of the judicial system is what expected from the citizens. This research paper will analyse the different case laws which had further stated different aspects and reasons to prove the contempt of a person. It will further look in to the aspects of the favour facet as well as the against facet of bringing up frequent contempt cases will raise the bar of the judiciary or not. The paper will also put a light on the excuses that can be presented to free a person from the charges of contempt.