JAIPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

A venture of Seedling Group of Educational Institutions

SEEDLING SCHOOL OF LAW AND

GOVERNANCE

PROJECT REPORT ON JURISPRUDENCE ON CONTEMPT BY ADVOCATE.

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

MRS. GARIMA DHAKA ARYAN RAY

ASST. PROF(SSLG) BA.LLB(HONS)

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am using this opportunity to express my gratitude to Mrs. Garima Dhaka Ma’am, who
provided me this opportunity to better understand and gain knowledge about the various
components of JURISPRUDENCE ON CONTEMPT by providing me this Project topic. I am
thankful for her aspiring guidance, invaluably constructive criticism and friendly advice
during the project work. I am sincerely grateful to her for sharing her truthful and
illuminating views on a number of issues related to the project.

I express my warm thanks to all my friends and colleagues for their support and guidance to
complete my project.

Thank you,

Aryran ray

2
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the project work entitled “JURISPRUDENCE ON CONTEMPT BY

ADVOCATE” submitted to the JNU Jaipur, is a record of an original work done by me

under the guidance of Mrs. Garima Dhaka, Assistant Professor, Seedling School of Law &
Governance, Jaipur National University.

And this project work is submitted in the partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award
of the degree of BA.LLB(Hons). The results embodied in this project report have not been
submitted to any other University or Institute for the award of any degree or diploma.

Aryan ray

3
 Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................................ 2

DECLARATION ....................................................................................................................................... 3
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................ 5
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 6
LEGAL DIMENSIONS & CONTEMPT OF COURT ....................................................................................... 8
Contempt of Court .............................................................................................................................. 8
Constitutional Provisions .................................................................................................................... 8
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 ..................................................................................................... 9
JURISPRUDENCE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT.............................................................................. 12
LANDMARK CASES DERIVING IMPLICATIONS & SANCTIONS BY COURT OF JUSTICE .. 17
CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 20

4
 ABSTRACT

The existing legal, political and social scenario requires a comprehensive understanding of
Law of Contempt in India. No in depth study of this important branch of law has so far been
undertaken. The present study is a humble attempt to ascertain the various nuances of this
branch of law and to see as to how this jurisprudence is being applied by the judiciary and
legislature to control the individuals and other organs of the state. The study aims to examine
the approach and attitude of the judiciary when there is interference with the Administration
of Justice and of any action affecting the dignity of the Judges. It also aims at ascertaining the
approach of the judiciary in case of disobedience of its orders either by individuals or by
administrative authorities including public corporations.

5
 INTRODUCTION

 The legal profession is a solemn and serious occupation. It is a noble calling and all
those who belong to it, are its honourable members. Although the entry to the
profession can be had acquiring merely the qualification of technical competence, the
honour as a professional has to be maintained by its members, by their exemplary
conduct both in and outside the court.
 The object and need of the contempt jurisdiction or contempt of Court the Court has
held that the object of the contempt power is not to vindicate the dignity and honour
of the individual Judge who is personally attacked or scandalized, but to uphold the
majesty of law and administration of justice. The foundation of the Judiciary is the
trust and confidence of the people in its ability to deliver fearless and impartial
justice.
 The judiciary is the guardian of the rule of law. Hence judiciary is not the third pillar
but the central pillar of the democratic state. Misconduct: it is a sufficiently wide
expression: it is not necessary that it should involve moral turpitude. Any conduct
which in any way renders a man unfit for the exercise of his profession or is likely to
hamper or embarrass the administration of justice maybe considered to be misconduct
calling for disciplinary action. It cannot be said that an advocate can never be
punished for professional misconduct committed by him in his personal capacity.

 Contempt is an intense feeling or attitude regarding someone or something as inferior,

base, or worthless. In law, it is a well-known expression and it is similar to scorn or
misprision.1
 It is disrespect to the court or the person connected with the courts or legislative body.
Thus law of contempt is basically intended to safeguard the interests of administration
of justice, which must necessarily be fearless, impartial and upright.
 The roots of contempt law in India can be traced back to the pre-independence period.
The East India Company took over the territories in India, which required the King of
England to issue the Charter of 1726 that provided for the establishment of a
corporation in each Presidency Town. This Charter is considered to be an important
landmark in the history of legal system in India as it introduced the English laws in

1 William Benton, The Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th edition, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., London, 1974, p.
167.

6
 the country. Mayor courts were constituted in each of the Presidency Towns and were
made the Courts of Record, and authorised to decide all civil cases within the
respective town and subordinate areas. Subsequently, in the year 1774, the Mayor’s
Court at Calcutta was replaced by the Supreme Court of Judicature at Fort William,
Calcutta under the Regulating Act 1773. The Mayor’s Courts at Madras and Bombay
were superseded by the Recorder’s Courts, which were also later abolished and
replaced by the Supreme Courts under the Government of India Act, 1800. While the
Supreme Court at Madras came into existence in the year 1801 by the Charter of
1800, the Supreme Court at Bombay came into existence in 1824 by the Charter of
1823. The Recorder’s Courts and Supreme Courts had the same powers in the matters
of punishing for contempt as was exercised by the superior courts in England.2 The
Supreme Courts were in turn succeeded by the High Courts under the Indian High
Courts Act of 1861. The three High Courts of Calcutta, Bombay and Madras had the
inherent power to punish for contempt.2 In 1866, the High Court of Allahabad was
established under the Indian High Courts Act, 1861 and was constituted as a court of
record with the power to punish for contempt.3
 The Contempt of Court Act, 1926 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act 1926”) was the
first statute in India with relation to law of contempt. Section 2 of this Act recognized
the existing jurisdiction in all the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves
and conferred on the High Courts the power to punish for contempt of courts
subordinate to it. The Act also specified the upper limit of the punishment that can be
imposed for the said contempt.

2
Report of the Committee on Contempt of Courts, February 1963. Available at
http://dspace.gipe.ac.in/xmlui/handle/10973/33748 (last accessed on April 16, 2018).
3
Ibid.

7
 LEGAL DIMENSIONS & CONTEMPT OF COURT

Contempt of Court
 As long ago as 1742 Lord Hardwicke L. C., delved into the meaning of the term
“contempt of court”, referring to three different kinds of actions that qualify as
contempt of court: “One kind of contempt is scandalising the court itself. There may
be likewise a contempt of this court in abusing parties who are concerned in causes
here. There may also be a contempt of this court in prejudicing mankind against
persons before the cause is heard.”4

 Halsbury’s Law of England defining “contempt of court” states: “Any act done or
writing published which is calculated to bring a court or a Judge into contempt, or to
lower his authority, or to interfere with the due course of justice or the lawful process
of the court, is a contempt of court. Any episode in the administration of justice may,
however be publicly or privately criticised, provided that the criticism is fair and
temperate and made in good faith. The absence of any intention to refer to a court is a
material point in favour of a person alleged to be in contempt.”5
 A contempt of court is a matter which concerns the administration of justice and the
dignity and authority of judicial tribunals6. The law dealing with contempt of courts is
for keeping the administration of justice pure and undefiled7; and, jurisdiction in
contempt is not a right of a party to be invoked for the redressal of its grievances

Constitutional Provisions
 It is well established that Rule of Law is a basic feature of the Constitution, and the
Rule of Law is postulated in the Constitution in the sense of its supremacy. 8 It entails
inter alia the right to obtain judicial redress through administration of justice, which is
the function of the Courts, and is imperative for the functioning of a civilised society.

4
In re : Read v. Huggonson, (1742) 2 Atk. 469.
5
Halsbury's Laws of England (3rd Edn., Vol. 8) at p. 7.
6
A. Ramalingam v. V. V. Mahalinga Nadar, AIR 1966 Mad. 21.
7
In re: Bineet Kumar Singh, AIR 2001 SC 2018; See also Shakuntala Sahadevram Tewari (Smt.) & Anr. v.
Hemchand M. Singhania, (1990) 3 Bom CR 82.
8
His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr., AIR 1973 SC 1461; Smt.
Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Shri Raj Narain & Anr., AIR 1975 SC 2299; Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record
Association & Anr. v. Union of India (2016) 5 SCC 1; State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajanlal & Ors, AIR 1992 SC
604.

8
 To administer justice in an undefiled manner, judiciary, as the guardian of Rule of
Law, is entrusted with the extraordinary power to punish misconduct aimed at
undermining its authority or bringing the institution into disrepute, whether outside or
inside the courts.
 The law for contempt, with power of imposing punishment, ensures respect for the
courts in the eyes of the public by guaranteeing sanction against conduct which might
assail the honour of the courts. Indeed, the courts must be able to discharge their
functions without fear or favour.
 Freedom of speech and expression is regarded as the “lifeblood of democracy”;
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees this freedom to the citizens of India.
This right, however, is not absolute, and is subject to certain qualifications i.e.
reasonable restrictions on the grounds set out in Article 19(2). One such ground
relates to the contempt of court. The Constitution, which has given its citizens right to
freedom of speech and expression, has given certain powers to the Judiciary to guard
against the misuse of the same, to prevent the right to freedom of speech and
expression being so exercised that it damages the dignity of the Courts or interferes
with the ‘administration of justice’.

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

 The Act 1971 was enacted to give effect to the recommendations contained in Sanyal
Committee report of 1963. A perusal of the ‘Statement of Objects and Reasons’ of the
Act 1971 shows that it was felt that the then existing law relating to Contempt of
Courts was somewhat uncertain, undefined and unsatisfactory, and as the jurisdiction
to punish for Contempt touches upon two important fundamental rights of the citizen,
namely the right to personal liberty and the right to freedom of speech and expression,
the subject required special scrutiny and consideration.
Section 2 of the Act, defines “contempt of court”, and distinguishes between “civil
contempt” and “criminal contempt”, reading as follows:
2. Definitions. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, -
a) “contempt of court” means civil contempt or criminal contempt;
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;

9
 c) “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 –
 scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any
court; or
 prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial
proceeding; or

10
interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of
justice in any other manner;
A disorderly conduct of a contemnor that causes serious damage to the institution of justice
administration amounts to contempt. Such conduct can be categorised on the basis of its
adverse effects and consequences under two heads: (i) one, where it has a temporary effect on
the system and/or the person concerned, such that will fade away with time; (ii) other, where
it causes permanent damage to the institution and to the administration of justice. Any
conduct attributing improper motive to a Judge or any scurrilous abuse to a Judge will
amount to scandalising the court under Section 2(c)(i) of the Act 1971.
Any speech tending to influence the result of a pending trial - civil or criminal - is a conduct
of grave contempt. Such comments on pending proceedings from the concerned parties or
their lawyers are generally a more serious contempt than those from any independent
sources.9

Section 10 of the Act deals with contempt of subordinate courts. It empowers the High Court
to “exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in accordance with the same
procedure and practice, in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it as it has and
exercises in respect of contempt of itself”. Proviso to the section carves an exception for cases
contempt which amount to an offence punishable under the India Penal Code, barring the
High Court from taking cognizance in such cases.

Section12 of the Advocates Act, 1961 prescribes the punishment for contempt of court and
the limits thereto; also laying down specifics of punishment for when the contemnor is a
company.

Section 14 of the Act lays down the procedure for when the contempt is in presence or
hearing of the Supreme Court or a High Court. Section 15 explains the procedure for dealing
with criminal contempt (other than those addressed under section 14) of the higher courts and
the subordinate courts.

9
State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Anr., AIR 1993 SC 1348.

11
 JURISPRUDENCE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT

 In early period man was free to act in any manner as he liked and his will to do an act
depended upon the strength of his limbs, strengthened by the use of arms, which he
developed day by day. That instinct to prevail over another survives even to this day,
both in social life and international spheres. Even today, there is a race to control the
world not only by use of weapons, but also by the control of economic conditions.
The society was formed by our first ancestors to bring peace, without which no
development is possible. If a man is in constant fear of losing his limb, life or
livelihood, the creative spirit in him remains dormant.10
 Therefore, it was agreed that individual liberties be curtailed to some extent and
disputes between the warring groups be settled by an independent agency. This
agency came to be called the „King‟. It was for the King to decide disputes arising
between men, who chose him to be King. The King formulated certain guidelines
which were termed laws. Every one in the society was expected to act in such a
manner so as not to come in conflict with these laws. If there was disobedience to the
laws, punishment was awarded for the same.

 Early the King used to hear the grievances of their subjects personally. Books on
ancient Hindu Law describe the elaborate procedure of Courts of justice presided over
by the King sitting on his throne with the book of law (Dharma Shastra) in his hand
and administering even-handed justice with the assistance of his counselors.
Administration of justice was a paramount duty of the English Kings in early times.
As late as the reign of Edward IV (1461-1483) the King used to sit on Circuit.11
 As the society expanded, disputes increased in number. It was not possible for the
King personally to settle all the disputes. He, therefore, appointed persons to perform
his duties. This is how “courts” came into existence. Most of the disputes were settled
by the courts on the basis of guidelines given by the King. Still the King retained his
right to hear any dispute himself.12 Being considered as the fountain head of justice all
courts received their judicial sustenance from the Royal source. The history of

10 Iyer’s, Law on Contempt of Courts with Law on Contempt of Parliament, State Assemblies and Public
Servants, 3rd edition, Delhi Law House, Delhi, 2004, p. 22.
11
Tek Chand, The Law of Contempt of Court and of Legislature, 2nd edition, the University Book Agency,
Allhabad, 1949, p. 2.
12
Aiyer’s, Law on Contempt of Courts with Law on Contempt of Parliament, State Assemblies and Public
Servants, 3rd edition, Delhi Law House, Delhi, 2004, p. 56.

12
 English Law Courts is the story of the delegation of judicial powers by the King to his
council. The exigencies of the times led to the emanation of its various off-shoots,
e.g., the Courts of Exchequer, Common Pleas and later on of Common Law. The
Curia Regis, the mother of Royal Courts, still retained the residue of justice and gave
birth to the Court of Chancery in the fifteenth century, and during the Tudor period to
the Court of Star Chamber, Court of Requests and Admiralty. The establishment of
the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, necessitated by the growth of the British
possessions overseas, is a much later creation of the reserve power of the King‟s
Council.13

 In this way, the decision given by the courts were the decisions of the King. If the
King‟s authority could not be questioned, then authority of the courts could not be
questioned. If the King could not be abused or scandalized, so also the courts could
not be abused or scandalized. Just as the proceedings before the King could not be
prejudice, or obstructed; similarly the proceedings before the court could also not be
prejudice or obstructed.
 If any one interfered in the administration of justice, he was liable to be punished. It is
the genesis of the law of contempt. King‟s word was law and he could not be
disobeyed. If a person was asked to stay, he had to stay. If he was asked to depart, he
had to depart. Anyone, howsoever high he may be, punished for disobedience and the
punishment had no limits. The condemned man could lose his property, liberty, limbs
or even his life. Since the King had the right to punish, he also had the right to pardon.
A sincere apology for any lapse could save the man from the wrath of the King. The
authority of the King traveled down to Superior Courts. Their word was also final, in
the ladder of various stages of the litigation. No one could question the authority of
the courts. No one could humiliate the courts or scandalize them and no one could
prejudice or obstruct the course of justice and anyone who did all this was punished.14
 The last bulwark of a State is its Courts of Justice. There can be a kingdom without an
army but public confidence in the authority of the State cannot remain if there are no
Courts of Justice.15 Ever since the dawn of civilization the Courts of Justice have been

13
Sir William Holdsworth, History of English Law, Sweet and Maxwell, London, 1969, p. 194.
14
Aiyer’s, Law on Contempt of Courts with Law on Contempt of Parliament, State Assemblies and Public
Servants, 3rd edition, Delhi Law House: Delhi, 2004, p. 154.
15
V. G. Ramachandran, The Contempt of Court under the Constitution, 5th edition, Eastern Book Company:
Lucknow, 1983, p.1.

13
 surrounded by a halo of solemnity. Law courts have, from time immemorial, been
considered as sacred temples where justice is dispensed by their high priests, the
judges. Mankind the world over has treated judicial tribunals with a reverence and
awe a parallel of which is not to be found in any other secular institution. Men‟s
minds have been mesmerized by the Majesty of Law. The power and prestige enjoyed
by the judges, the deep respect that is paid to them, the great deference with which
their judicial pronouncements are discussed, the reverential mode in which they are
addressed, the humility and the submissiveness with which they are approached, the
devout supplications in which they are entreated to hear their petitioners‟ prayers are
all indicative of the implicit faith that at one time mankind reposed in the divine
delegation of their Sovereigns from whom all justice emanated, and whose
representatives the judges were. Two reasons may be assigned for this supreme
ascendancy of courts of justice.16

 In the first place Decree of Law Courts, on account of their inexorable nature, could
not be flouted without serious risk to the victim of judicial displeasure. Not only the
decisions of matters momentous to the subject rest with the courts of law, but they
also wield power to give effect to their judgments. As protectors of the weak,
avengers of the wronged, champions of the oppressed and as arbiters in all disputes
between citizen and citizen and also between citizen and the State the authority of the
Judges is supreme and they are therefore in a position to command dutiful and prompt
obedience.

 Blackstone writes in his Commentaries: “as by our excellent constitution the sole
executive power of the laws is vested in the person of the King, it will follow, that all
courts of justice, which are the medium by which he administers the laws, are derived
from the power of the Crown. In all these courts the King is supposed in
contemplation of law to be always present, but as that is in fact impossible, he is then
represented by his judges whose power is only an emanation of the Royal
Prerogative.”17

16
Tek Chand, The Law of Contempt of Court and of Legislature, 2nd edition, the University Book Agency:
Allhabad, 1949, p. 1.
17
Tek Chand, The Law of Contempt of Court and of Legislature, 2nd edition, the University Book Agency:
Allhabad, 1949, p. 2.

14
  Long and close association of the law courts with the person of the Sovereign,
coupled with extensive authority over subjects of all classes, elevated them to a very
high pedestal of power and prestige. Any disrespect shown to a judge is insult offered
to the Sovereign for which the wrong-doer must receive severe punishment. “In its
origin”, says Oswald,18 “all legal contempt will be found to consist in an offence
more or less direct against the Sovereign himself as the fountain-head of law and
justice, or against his place, where justice was administered.”
 Free and fare administration of justice depends upon non interference by any authority
or organ in that great process. When there is interference by an individual, press or
any other organ of the state in the administration of justice, judiciary intervenes as the
protector of the rule of law through its contempt power. The basic purpose of the
contempt jurisdiction is to provide sanction against any word or conduct which is
likely to prejudice or interfere with fair trial.19
 Impartial administration of justice and respect of judiciary depend not only on the
non-interference in the judicial process but also on the due execution of the orders of
the Court. If the orders of the court can be disobeyed with impunity, the tendency to
disobey will receive encouragement. In order to check such tendencies, special
provisions have been made in the form of contempt jurisdiction.

 “Rule of Law” is the basic rule of governance of any civilized democratic polity.
Everyone, whether individually or collectively is unquestionably under the supremacy
of law. Whoever the person may be, however high he or she is, no one is above the
law, notwithstanding how powerful and how rich he or she may be. For achieving the
establishment of the Rule of Law, the Constitution of India has assigned the special
task to the judiciary in the Country. It is only through the courts that the Rule of Law
unfolds its contents and establishes its concept. For the judiciary to perform its duties
and functions effectively and true to the spirit with which it is sacredly entrusted, the
dignity and authority of the courts have to be respected and protected at all costs.
After sixty three years of independence, the judiciary in the country is under a
constant threat and being endangered from within and without. The need of the time is
of restoring confidence amongst the people for the independence of judiciary. Its

18
Oswald James F., Contempt of Court: Committal, Attachment, and Arrest upon Civil Process, Butterworths:
London, 1910, p.1.
19
K. Balasankaran Nair, Law of Contempt of Court In India, Atlantic Publishers and Distributers, 2004, P. 3.

15
 impartiality and the glory of law has to be maintained, protected and strengthened.
The confidence in the Courts of Justice, which the people possess, cannot, in any way,
be allowed to tarnished, diminished or wiped out by contumacious behaviour of any
person. The only weapon of protecting itself from on the onslaught to the institution is
the long hand of contempt of court left in the armoury of judicial repository which,
when needed, can reach any neck howsoever high or far away it may be.20

 One of the basic principles of any civilized system of justice is that a person is entitled
to fair free trial from prejudice. One purpose of the law of contempt is to provide
sanctions against any word or conduct which is likely to prejudice fair trial. There is
no unanimity of opinion as to the exact purpose of the law of contempt. Lord
President Clyde,21 Phillimore Committee,22and Justice Frankfurter23 expressed the
opinion that the contempt law exists for the maintenance of fundamental supremacy
of law.
 In a democratic society, the three organs of the Government namely the Executive,
the Legislature and the Judiciary are expected to perform their functions within their
limitations for the benefit of the public. No organ is expected to interfere with the
functioning of the other. Though judiciary is entrusted with the function of
administration of justice, it cannot claim superiority over other two organs and hence
it has to be given all the requirements needed for upholding the majesty of law,
particularly when it has neither the power of purse nor the power of the police. So,
through contempt proceedings, the judiciary performs its function of proper
administration of justice and safeguards the Rule of Law. But the contempt
jurisdiction which is extraordinary in its character should not be used for the personal
protection of judges. This jurisdiction is applied against any authority or person
whenever there is any kind of interference in the administration of justice. The
judiciary uses the weapon of contempt jurisdiction to maintain the supremacy of law
when interference is caused by the executive or the individual or the press.24

20
Aiyer’s, Law on Contempt of Courts with Law on Contempt of Parliament, State Assemblies and Public
Servants, 3rd edition, Delhi Law House, Delhi, 2004, p. 20.
21
Johnson v. Grant, (1923) SC 789.
22
Report of the Committee on Contempt of Court, 6 (1974).
23
Offut v. U. S. (1954) 348, U.S. 11.
24
K. Balasankaran Nair, Law of Contempt of Court in India, Atlantic Publishers and Distributers, 2004, P. 9.

16
LANDMARK CASES DERIVING IMPLICATIONS & SANCTIONS BY
COURT OF JUSTICE
 The Supreme Court of India in re Viney Chandra Mishra,25 held that the judiciary is
not only the guardian of the Rule of Law and the third pillar but in fact the central
pillar of a democratic State. If the judiciary is to perform its duties and functions
effectively and true to the spirit with which they are sacredly entrusted, the dignity
and authority of the courts have to be respected and protected at all costs. Otherwise
the very cornerstone of our Constitutional scheme will give way and it will disappear
the rule of law and the civilized life in the society.
 Similarly, in re Arundhati Roy,26 Apex Court held that the foundation of the
judiciary is the trust and the confidence of the people in its ability to deliver fearless
and impartial justice. When the foundation itself is shaken by acts which tend to
create disaffection and disrespect for the authority of the court by creating distrust in
its working, the edifice of the judicial system gets eroded. The power to punish for
contempt anyone who interferes with the administration of justice is an inherent
power vested in the judiciary.27 This may appear to be an arbitrary power, because the
role of prosecutor and adjudicator is combined in one person or one body of persons.
But it is a necessary power for the protection of the impartial administration of justice
to maintain the majesty of law.

 WHERE THE ENTIRE CASE HAS ALREADY BEEN APPEALED,

JURISDICTION TO PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT RESTS WITH THE
APPELLATE COURT OR WHERE THERE IS A TENDENCY TO AFFECT
THE STATUS QUO OR INTERFERE WITH THE JURISDICTION OF THE
APPELLATE COURT. — The rule, as now accepted anddeemed applicable to the
present incident, is that where the entire case has already been appealed, jurisdiction
to punish for contempt rests with the appellate court where the appeal
 completely transfers the proceedings thereto or where there is a tendency to affect the
status quo or otherwise interfere with the jurisdiction of the appellate court.
Accordingly, this Court having acquired jurisdiction over the complaint for indirect

25
(1995) 2 SCC 584.
26
(2003) 3 SCC 349.
27
Felix Frankfurter, Power of Congress over Procedure in Criminal Contempts in inferior Federal Courts – a
Study in Separation of Powers 1924, 37 Harv. L. Rev., p. 1010.

17
 contempt against herein respondents, it has taken judicial cognizance thereof and has
accordingly resolved the same.
 Although apparently different in legal bases, the authority to punish for contempt and
to discipline lawyers are both inherent in the Supreme Court and are equally incidents
of the court's basic power to oversee the proper administration of justice and the
orderly discharge of judicial functions.28

 In Kapildeo Prasad Sah & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors.,29 the Supreme Court held
that disobedience of court’s order would be a violation of the principle of Rule of
Law. The law of contempt can thus be considered to be the thread which holds
together the basic structure of the Constitution. And, the maintenance of dignity of the
Court is one of the cardinal principles of Rule of Law. The law of contempt must be
judiciously pressed into service, and must not be used as a tool to seek retribution.
However, any insinuation to undermine the dignity of the Court under the garb of
mere criticism is liable to be punished.30
 The Contempt proceedings are intended to ensure compliance of the orders of the
court and adherence to the Rule of Law. Once the essentials for initiation of contempt
proceedings are satisfied, the Court would initiate an action uninfluenced by the
nature of the direction, i.e., as to whether these directions were specific in a lis
pending between the parties or were of general nature or were in rem.
 In Aswini Kumar Ghose & Anr. v. Arabinda Bose & Anr31., the Supreme Court held
that while fair and reasonable criticism of a judicial act in the interest of public good
would not amount to contempt, it would be gross contempt to impute that Judges of
the Court acted on extraneous considerations in deciding a case.
 The Supreme Court observed in the case of Pallav Sheth v. Custodian & Ors.32, that
there is no doubt that the Supreme Court and High Courts are courts of record, and
that the Constitution has given them the power to punish for contempt, which power
cannot be “abrogated or stultified”.

28
Zaldivar vs. Sandiganbayan, October 7, 1988,166 SCRA 316
29
(1999) 7 SCC 569,21
30
In Re : Arundhati Roy, AIR 2002 SC 1375.
31
AIR 1953 SC 75
32
AIR 2001 SC 2763

18
  In Aswini Kumar Ghose & Anr. v. Arabinda Bose & Anr.33, the Supreme Court held
that while fair and reasonable criticism of a judicial act in the interest of public good
would not amount to contempt, it would be gross contempt to impute that Judges of
the Court acted on extraneous considerations in deciding a case.
 In Re: C. S. Karnan case34, Justice Karnan, the judge of the Calcutta High Court, was
restrained from taking up any judicial or administrative work. The Court observed
that the authority of the courts to punish for contempt of court has always been there
in the legal history.

33
AIR 1953 SC 75
34
(2017) 2 SCC 756

19
 CONCLUSION
The Supreme Court is vested with the right to punish those guilty of contempt of Court under
Article 129 read with Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The power to punish
contemners is also vested with the High Courts under Article 215 of the Constitution and the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 also governs the punishments given by the High Court. This
act in no way controls the jurisdiction of the Apex Court. The Court in In Re: Vinay Mishra
misconstrued Article 129 read with 142 and robbed the Bar to of all powers to try and punish
those for professional misconduct. It even assumed jurisdiction when Section 38 of the
Advocates Act, 1961 explicitly provides only appellate jurisdiction to the Apex Court. The
Court punished Shri Mishra by suspending him thus the petition arose in the 1998 case,
Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India. The Court overruled the Mishra case and
recognized the Bar Council's power to try and punish all those guilty of professional
misconduct. It is well settled that contempt proceedings are brought about to protect the
majesty of law and uphold the judiciary's position, the central pillar in Indian
democracy, among the public and give them reason to keep their faith in the
administration of justice. Contempt proceedings are not brought about to restore the
pride of the Judge in the Court or against whose order their was contempt. In the Mishra
case the Court instead of protecting the image of the Judiciary, the upholder of the law,
knowingly or unknowingly, tried to restore the pride of the Judge by suspending the advocate
Mishra who might have been influenced by his high position in the Bar, and felt that
appropriate punishment might not be meted out to him. In the Supreme Court Bar
Association case the court took a very objective view and taking the help of law and
construing it in the right way came to the conclusion that the power to punish for any
professional misconduct rests with the Bar, whereas to punish for contempt only it has
jurisdiction for itself and subordinate courts. No statute can take contempt jurisdiction away
from the Supreme as well as the High Court.

20
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS REFERRED:

 Tek Chand, The Law of Contempt of Court and of Legislature, 2nd edition, the
University Book Agency: Allhabad, 1949.
 Oswald James F., Contempt of Court: Committal, Attachment, and Arrest upon Civil
Process, Butterworths: London, 1910.
 K. Balasankaran Nair, Law of Contempt of Court In India, Atlantic Publishers and
Distributers, 2004.
 Aiyer’s, Law on Contempt of Courts with Law on Contempt of Parliament, State
Assemblies and Public Servants, 3rd edition, Delhi Law House, Delhi, 2004.

WEBSITES REFERRED:

21