An Act to define and limit the powers of certain courts in punishing contempts of courts and to (1) This Act may be called the Contempt of Courts Act, The Contempt of Courts Act, INTRODUCTION. The origin of the law of Contempt in India can be traced from the English law. In. England Superior Courts. Full text containing the act, Contempt of Courts Act, , with all the sections, schedules, short title, enactment date, and footnotes.
|Language:||English, Arabic, Dutch|
|Genre:||Business & Career|
|ePub File Size:||27.43 MB|
|PDF File Size:||15.43 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
The Contempt of Courts Act, brozokpulepsmen.cf brozokpulepsmen.cf 6. Complaint against presiding officers of subordinate courts. Review of the Contempt of Courts Act, Open PDF. The Law Commission of India (Chair: Justice B.S. Chauhan) submitted its report on the Contempt of. The roots of contempt law in India can be traced back to the pre- independence period. . brozokpulepsmen.cf (Last accessed on April 4, ).
The report examined whether the definition of contempt in the Act should be restricted to civil contempt, i. The Commission concluded that there was no requirement to amend the Act, for the reasons stated below: High number of contempt cases: The Commission observed that there were a high number of civil 96, and criminal contempt cases pending in various High Courts and the Supreme Court.
The Commission observed that the high number of cases justify the continuing relevance of the Act. It stated that amending the definition of contempt may reduce the overall impact of the law and lessen the respect that people have for courts and their authority and functioning. However, it noted that there were two differences in circumstances in India and the United Kingdom, which warranted a continuation of the offence in India.
First, India continues to have a high number of criminal contempt cases, while the last offence of Scandalising the Court in the UK was in Second, the offence of Scandalising the Court continues to be punishable in UK under other laws. The Commission observed that abolishing the offence in India would leave a legislative gap.
Source of contempt power: The Commission observed that the superior courts Supreme Court and High Courts derive their contempt powers from the Constitution. The Act only outlines the procedure in relation to investigation and punishment for contempt. Therefore, deletion of the offence from the Act will not impact the inherent constitutional powers of the superior courts to punish anyone for its contempt.
These powers will continue to remain, independent of the Act. Impact on subordinate courts: The Constitution allows superior courts to punish for their contempt. The Act additionally allows the High Court to punish for contempt of subordinate courts.
The Commission argued that if the definition of contempt is narrowed, subordinate courts will suffer as there will be no remedy to address cases of their contempt. Ambiguity: The Commission observed that amending the definition of contempt will lead to ambiguity.
It was, therefore, considered advisable to have the entire law on the subject scrutinized by a special committee.
In pursuance of this, a committee was set up in under the chairmanship of the late H N Sanyal, the then additional solicitor general. The committee made a comprehensive examination of the law and problems relating to contempt of court in the light of the position obtaining in our own country and various foreign countries.
The recommendations, which the committee made, took note of the importance given to freedom of speech in the Constitution and of the need for safeguarding the status and dignity of courts and interests of administration of justice. The recommendations of the committee have been generally accepted by the government after considering the view expressed on those recommendations by the state governments, union territory administrations, the Supreme Court, the high courts and the judicial commissioners.
A case of contempt is C. Daphtary v.
Gupta 1 SCC , the respondent published and circulated a booklet in public purporting to ascribe bias and dishonesty to Justice Shah while acting in his judicial capacity. Daphtary, along with others, filed a petition alleging that the booklet has scandalised the judges who participated in the decision and brought into contempt the authority of the highest court of the land and thus weakened the confidence of the people in it.
The Supreme Court, in examining the scope of the contempt of court, laid down that the test in each case is whether the impugned publication is a mere defamatory attack on the judge or whether it will interfere with the due course of justice or the proper administration of law by the court.
Article and of the Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and High Court respectively to punish people for their respective contempt. Section 10 of The Contempt of Courts Act of defines the power of the High Court to punish contempts of its subordinate courts.
Power to punish for contempt of court under Articles and is not subject to Article 19 1 a. Essentials The elements generally needed to establish a contempt are: 1.
Types According to Lord Hardwick, there is a three-fold classification of Contempt: 1. Scandalizing the court itself. Abusing parties who are concerned in the cause, in the presence of court.In the list of Amending Acts only Act is mentioned.
Om Prakash Jaiswal v.
The Commission further noted that the Act had withstood judicial scrutiny, and therefore, there was no reason to amend it. Justice B. Scribd Government Docs.
In re: Civil contempt refers to the wilful disobedience of an order of any court. Act partly in force at Appeal by Edmond C. The Act additionally allows the High Court to punish for contempt of subordinate courts.