TAMILNADU NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL

TIRUCHIRAPALLI

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW II

PROJECT PRESENTATION- JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN

INDIA

FOURTH SEMESTER 2016

PRAVEEN.C

BA0140041

1 | Page
 ACKNOLEDGEMENT

This project could not have been done without the help, guidance, and support of few
people who stood by my side from the very beginning of this project.

Im very glad and grateful to Prof. Mr. M. Mahindra Prabu who was the initiative and
inspired me to take up this project. His contribution to this project is an immense one.

Im also grateful to my parents and friends who all stood as a pillar of support for me
during this entire research work. Their contribution to this project is an indispensable
one.

2 | Page
DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP

I, PRAEEN.C hereby declare that this project titled submitted to Tamil Nadu National
Law School, Tiruchirappalli, is the record of a bona fide work done by me under the
expert guidance of the venerated ECONOMICS faculty of Tamil Nadu National Law
School, Tiruchirappalli.

All authentic information furnished in the project is true to the best of my knowledge and
belief.

Submitted to: Asst. Prof. Mr. M. Mahindra Prabu

Submitted by: PRAVEEN.C

3 | Page
 Index of Authorities

List of Cases referred

1. Supreme court Bar association v. Union of India, (1998) 4 scc 409 (paras 10 and 12); AIR 1998
sc 1895
2. Chetak construction Ltd. V. Om prakash,(1998) 4 SCC 577 (para 23):AIR 1998SC 1855
3. Supreme court Bar Association v. Union of India,(1998) 4 SCC 409 (para 12): AIR 1998 sc 1895
4. T. sudhakar Prasad v. Prashant Bushan, (2001) 6 SCC 735, 741 (para 12): AIR 2001 sc 3395
5. J.R. Parashar v. prashant Bhushan (2001) 6 SCC 735, 741 (para 12) :AIR 2001 sc 3395.
6. State of Rajasthan v.Mohan Singh, 1995 supp (2) SCC 153 (para 2)
7. Direction of Eduction, Uttaranchal v. Ved prakash Joshi, (2005) 6 SCC 98,100 (para 7): AIR
2005 SC 3114.
8. J.R. Parashar v. Prashant Bhushan, (2001) 6 SCC 735, 745-7746 (para 30): AIR 2001 SC 3395.
9. Commissioner, Agra v. Rohtasnsingh, (1998) 1 SCC 349 (para 67 and 8): AIR 1998 SC 1895.
10. Supreme court Bar Association v. union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409 (para 41): AIR 1998 SC
1895 and K. Gopalan Nair v. K.Balakrishnan Nair (2005) 12 scc 350, 351 (para 3)
11. T.Sudhakar Prasad v. Government of A.P., (2000) 1SCC 516,525 (para 9) (2001) 1 JT 204.
12. S.N. Banerjee v. Kuchwar Lime and stone co, LTD, AIR 1938 pc 295; 43 CWN 197.
13. Babulal V. Municipal Corpn, Ratlam, (2005) 13 SCC 101
14. A case of contempt is C.K. Daphtary v. O.P. Gupta (1971 1 SCC 626),

15. Supreme court bar association v. Union of india (1998) 4 scc 409(para 37): AIR 1998 sc 1895.
Godavarman Thirumulpad (102) v. Ashok khot, (2006) 5 scc 1, 18 (para 35) : AIR 2006 sc 1367.
16. Arundhati Roy, In re, (2002) 3 scc 343, 375 (paras 34 and 35) :AIR 2002 sc 1375.
17. Sodhi sukhdev singh v. chief justice, (1954) SCR 454 (563) : AIR 1954 SC 186. Ajay Kumar
Pandey, (1996)6 SCC 510 (para 45) :AIR 1997 SC 260
18. Pirtampal v. High court of M.P AIR 1992 sc 904 :1993 supp. (1) SCC 529
19. Delhi judicial service assn. V. State of Gujarat (1991) 4 sec 406
20. Chairman, Ludhiana Improvement Trust v. Kanwaljit Singh (Dr.) v. K.K.sethi, (1998) 8 SCC
640.
21. N.C. Das v. M.a. Mohsin, (1997) 7 SCC 438 (para 2).
22. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SKIPPER CONSTRUCTION [1995 SCC (3) 507]

23. Daphtary, C.K. v. Gupta, o.p., AIR 1971 SC 1132 (1146, 1149, 1151)): (1971) 1 SCC 626
24. Cf. Suhdev Singh Sodhi v. Chief justice, (1954) SCR 454 (453): AIR 1954 SC 186
25. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SKIPPER CONSTRUCTION [1995 SCC (3) 507]

26. N.C. Das v. M.a. Mohsin, (1997) 7 SCC 438 (para 3).
27. N.C. Das v. M.A. Mohsin, (1997) 7 SCC 439 (para 3)
28. SHRI SANJIV DATTA, DEPUTY SECRETARY,MINISTRY OF INFORMATION &
BROADCASTING [1995 SCC (3) 619]

29. Chetak construction Ltd v. Om Praksh, (1998) 4 SCC 438 (para 3)

30. David Jude v. Hannah Grace Jude, (2003) 10 SCC 760-66 (paras 18 and 19)
31. AIR 1991 SC 2176 :1991 SCC (4) 406
32. Sohan Lal Gupta v. Asha Devi Gupta, (2003) 7 SCC 492, 510-11 (para 50-52):AIR 2004 SC 856.
33. M.b. sanghi, Advocate v. High court of Punjab and Haryana AIR 1991 SC 1834:1991(3)SCC
600

4 | Page
 34. Prem surana v. Additional Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, (2002) 6 SCC 722, 726,727 (para 10):
AIR 2002 SC 2956
35. Nair service society v. S.P. Anand, (1998) 6 scc 466 (para 61-63) :AIR 2007 SC 2891.
36. Daphtary, c,k. v. gupta, o.p., AIR 1971 sc 1132 (para 61,66,69)(1971) 1 SCC 626.

COURT OF RECORD

5 | Page
INTRODUCTION

A court of record is a court whereof the acts and judicial proceedings are enrolled for a
perpetual memory and testimony, the records of which are admitted to be of evidentiary value and are
not to be questioned when produced before any court. A court of record as such has power to punish for
its contempt. 1

This topic, refer to Court of record which implies a court whose demonstrations and
continuing are selected for persistent memory and evidence proof in court. Art.129 describes just
preeminent court might be the court of record and should have all the power of such a court including
the ability to punish for contempt of itself and the Art. 215 contain comparable procurement in
admiration of the high court. Both the Supreme Court and also the high court will be court of record
having power to punishment for contempt.

Importance of Court of Record

Contempt of court jurisdiction is a special jurisdiction and must be used to uphold

the dignity of the court and the majesty of law and keep the administration of justice
unpolluted, where the fact and circumstance so justify 2 and to enable the court to
administer justice according to law in a regular, orderly and effective manner and to
prevent interference in due administration of justice. 3

Contempt jurisdiction is excised for the purpose of upholding the majesty of law and dignity of the
judicial system as also of court and tribunals entrusted with the task of administering delivery of justice.
Power of contempt has been invoked, as a step in that direction, for enforcing compliance with orders of
courts and punishing for lapses in the manner of compliance. The majesty of judicial institution is to be
ensured so that it may not be lowered and the functional utility of the constitution edifice is preserved
from being rendered ineffective. The proceedings for contempt of court cannot be issued merely the
decree of the court. However, with a view to preserving the flow of the stream of justice in its unsullied
from and in unstinted purity, wilful defiance with the mandate of the court is treated to be contemptuous.
Available of jurisdiction to punish for contempt provide efficacy to functioning of the judicial forum and
enables the enforcement of the order an account of its deterrent effect on avoidance.4

Purpose of the law of contempt

A civil society is founded on a respect for the law. If every citizen chose to break the law, we would
have no society at all, at least not a civil one. It is this respect for the law and the law-enforcing agencies
that somewhat paradoxically, ensure the freedoms recognised in the constitution. The respect is at best a

1 Supreme court Bar association v. Union of India, (1998) 4 SCC 409 (paras 10 and 12); AIR 1998 sc 1895

2 Chetak construction Ltd. V. Om prakash,(1998) 4 SCC 577 (para 23):AIR 1998SC 1855

3 Supreme court Bar Association v. Union of India,(1998) 4 SCC 409 (para 12): AIR 1998 sc 1895

4 T. sudhakar Prasad v. Prashant Bushan, (2001) 6 SCC 735, 741 (para 12): AIR 2001 sc 3395

6 | Page
fragile foundation. While it is to be built and sustained by the conduct of the persons administering the
law, it has to be shored up by sanctions for factual breaches of the law and for actions destroying that
respect. The law of contempt is framed for the second purpose.5

Research Objective

To study and analyse the importance of court of record at different level of courts by referring
case laws and legislations.
To critically understand the powers of the Supreme Court in maintaining court of record.
To thoroughly understand the evidentiary value of the court of record.

Research Question

Whether the District Court are a court of record under High Court?

Whether the court of record are beneficial in judicial proceedings?

Whether the court of record has the power to punish for its contempt?

Review of literature

The researcher has extensively relied upon primary sources (The Constitution of India, 1950; the
contempt of court 1971, The Indian Penal Code,1960 etc.) and secondary sources such as (Shukla V.N,
Constitutional Law of India, Eastern Book Co., INDIA, 2008, 11th ed., Durga Das Basu , shorter
constitution of India, vol I ,4th ed., 2009.M.P jain)

Research Methodology

The Author has opted a doctrine research based upon the powers or different court under the article 2 of
constitution of India with references to the case laws laid down by the apex court.

Scope of the study:

Where the order of the High court had become final after being upheld by the supreme court, supreme
court could not modify the said order in its contempt jurisdiction in spite of there being certain
difficulties in the implementation of the said order.6

While dealing with an application for contempt with the question whether the earlier decision
which has received it finality had been complied with or not. It would not be permissible for a court to
examine the correctness of the earlier decision. The court exercising contempt jurisdiction is primarily
concerned with the question of contumacious conduct of the party who is alleged to have committed

5 J.R. Parashar v. prashant Bhushan (2001) 6 SCC 735, 741 (para 12) :AIR 2001 sc 3395.

6 State of Rajasthan v.Mohan Singh, 1995 supp (2) SCC 153 (para 2)

7 | Page
default in complying with the direction in the judgement or order, non-compliance of which is alleged. It
cannot test correctness otherwise of the order or give additional direction or delete any direction.7

Scope of enquiry

Where the petitioner alleged that, while protesting against shouting of slogan and holding dharna
against the supreme court by the respondents, the Apex court held that it had no concern with any
scuffle that may or may not taken place during the dharna and observed that it was a matter entirely
person to the petitioners and not call for an enquiry in the contempt jurisdiction.8

Nature

Contempt proceedings are not like proceeding for the prosecution of criminals. It is a matter between
the court and the contempt and is a quasi-criminal proceeding. It is open to the state to nominate it
advocate to appear for its officials in contempt proceeding.9 It is not strict speaking, tried as an
adversarial litigation. The party which brings the contumacious conduct of the condemner to the notice
of the court, whether a private person or a subordinate court is only an informant and does not have the
status of a litigant.10Arts.129 and 215 of the constitution of India do not confer any new jurisdiction or
status on the supreme court or the High courts. They merely recognise a pre-existing situation that the
supreme court and the high court are courts of record by virtue of which they have inherent power to
punish for contempt is summary. Its is not governed or limited by any rules of procedure excepting the
principle of the natural justice. The jurisdiction contemplated under the two article is in alienable. It
cannot be taken away or whittled down by any legislative enactment subordinate to the constitution. The
provisions of the contempt of court Act, 1971 are in addition to and not in derogation of the two articles
and cannot be used for limiting or regulating the exercise of jurisdiction contemplated under the said
cannot be used for limaiting or regulating the jurisdiction contemplated under the said two articles.11

CHAPTER II
7 Direction of Eduction, Uttaranchal v. Ved prakash Joshi, (2005) 6 SCC 98,100 (para 7): AIR 2005 SC 3114.

8 J.R. Parashar v. Prashant Bhushan, (2001) 6 SCC 735, 745-7746 (para 30): AIR 2001 SC 3395.

9 Commissioner, Agra v. Rohtasnsingh, (1998) 1 SCC 349 (para 67 and 8): AIR 1998 SC 1895. See also jaipure
Municipal corpn. V. C.L. mishra, (2005) 8 SCC 423,426,427 (para 9) (2005) 9 JT 195

10 Supreme court Bar Association v. union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409 (para 41): AIR 1998 SC 1895 and K.
Gopalan Nair v. K.Balakrishnan Nair (2005) 12 scc 350, 351 (para 3)

11 T.Sudhakar Prasad v. Government of A.P., (2000) 1SCC 516,525 (para 9) (2001) 1 JT 204.

8 | Page
 This issue is a debatable one as the privy council12 has held that the person aiding and abetting
contempt can be punished and the high court in a case had proceeded on the basis that such a party could
not be proceeded against. The supreme court remitted the matter for decision afresh.13

CONTEMPT OF COURT

Anything that curtails or impairs the opportunity of points of confinement of the judicial
procedures should of need result in hampering of the organization of Law and in meddling with the
proper method of equity. This fundamentally constitutes disdain of court. Oswald characterizes disdain
to be constituted by any lead that has a tendency to bring the power and organization of Law into
irreverence or slight or to meddle with or bias gatherings or their observers amid prosecution. Halsbury
characterizes disdain as comprising of words talked or composed which block or have a tendency to
discourage the organization of equity. Dark Odgers articulates that it is disdain of court to distribute
words which have a tendency to bring the organization of Justice into hatred, to preference the
reasonable trial of any cause or matter which is the subject of Civil or Criminal continuing or in at any
rate to impede the reason for Justice.

If there should arise an occurrence of India, under Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act
of 1971 characterizes hatred of court as common disdain or criminal scorn, it is for the most part felt that
the current law identifying with scorn of courts is fairly dubious, unclear and unsuitable. The ward to
rebuff for scorn touches upon two essential principal privileges of the natives, to be specific, the
privilege to individual freedom and the privilege to opportunity of expression. It was, hence, viewed as
prudent to have the whole law on the subject examined by a unique board of trustees.

In compatibility of this, an advisory group was set up in 1961 under the chairmanship of
the late H N Sanyal, the then extra specialist general. The board of trustees made an exhaustive
examination of the law and issues identifying with scorn of court in the light of the position getting in
our own nation and different remote nations. The proposals, which the board of trustees made, observed
the significance given to the right to speak freely in the Constitution and of the requirement for
protecting the status and nobility of courts and hobbies of organization of equit14

12 S.N. Banerjee v. Kuchwar Lime and stone co, LTD, AIR 1938 pc 295; 43 CWN 197.

13 Babulal V. Municipal Corpn, Ratlam, (2005) 13 SCC 101

14 M.P. JAIN., Indian constitution Law pag 207,208

9 | Page
 The proposals of the board of trustees have been for the most part acknowledged by the
legislature in the wake of considering the view communicated on those suggestions by the state
governments, union domain organizations, the Supreme Court, the high courts and the legal chiefs.

A case of contempt is C.K. Daphtary v. O.P. Gupta 15

The respondent distributed and circulate a booklet out in the open implying to attribute predisposition
and deceptive nature to Justice Shah while acting in his legal limit. Mr C.K. Daphtary, alongside others,
documented a request of claiming that the booklet has scandalized the judges who took an interest in the
choice and brought into disdain the power of the most astounding court of the land and in this manner
debilitated the certainty of the general population in it. The Supreme Court, in looking at the extent of
the disdain of court, set out that the test for every situation is whether the reviled production is a
unimportant defamatory assault on the judge or whether it will meddle with the proper method of equity
or the best possible organization of law by the court.

Punishment for contempt of court

The nature and type of punishment identified in the contempt of contempt of court Act does not
impinge upon the inherent power of the supreme court and the high court.16
The parties withdrew a sum of Rs. 16 lakh which where the property of custodial legis. Where after
issuance of contempt notice they get chance from supreme court for making the payment but they didnt
responsive at the ordered time. They made no settlement even after obtaining the best opportunity for
the same and realised from paying the decretal amount even after unconstitutional offer to pay. Besides,
they submitted a simple and false answer for the contempts notice issued by supreme court. In such
circumstances, the apex court did not consider the sentence fine alone enough and sentenced them to
simple imprisonment of two month and fine of Rs 2000/- and along with for default of payment of
which further simple imprisonment of one month17. But the Apex court says where the parties where
women, so court take magnamity of law and hoping that better sense and wisdom upon her in future to
serve the cause of art and literature by her and wisdom upon her in future to serve the cause of art and
literature by her creative skill and imagination, she being a writer, held that the end justice would be
met, if she was sentenced to simple imprisonment for three months18
Weather the power can be abridge by legislation

15

16 Supreme courtc bar association v. Union of india (1998) 4 scc 409(para 37): AIR 1998 sc 1895. The sc started
the recognised and accept punishment for contempt and determination therefore. See also Zahira habibullah
sheikh (5) v. State of Gujarat, (2006) 3 scc 374,390 (para 21) : AIR 2006 sc 1367

17 Bank of India v. vijaya Transport, (2000)8 scc 512: 2000 supp (1) JT 391, see also T.N. Godavarman
Thirumulpad (102) v. Ashok khot, (2006) 5 scc 1, 18 (para 35) : AIR 2006 sc 1367.

18 Arundhati Roy, In re, (2002) 3 scc 343, 375 (paras 34 and 35) :AIR 2002 sc 1375.

10 | P a g e
 The power can not be abridge by legislation where the power conferred by supreme court and
high court by the art 129 and 21, respectively, but it cannot be abridged by legislate and including the
contempt of courts Act19 and advocate Act nor are they controlled by anything in the Cr.p.c.20

Supreme courts power to punish for the contempt

In the case Delhi judicial service assn. V. State of Gujarat it has21 been held that under art 129 the
supreme court has power to punish a person for contempt of it self as well as of its subordinate court.
The expression including extends and widens the scope of power. The plain language of art 129 clearly
indicate s that the supreme court as the court of record has power to punish for contempt of itself and
also something else which would fall with in the inherent jurisdicit to safeguard and protect the
subordinate of the court of Record. This inherent power is necessary to safeguard and product the
subordinate judiciary which forms the very back bone of administration of justice. In the instant case the
court had sent five police officer to jail as they were found guilty of criminal contempt for harassing and
handcuffing the chef judicial magistrate of town Nadiad in the state of Gujarat.

CHAPTER III
Types

However in India contempt of court is of two types:

a) Civil contempt
b) Criminal contempt

1. Civil Contempt

Under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, civil Contempt has been characterized as
wilful defiance to any judgment, order, bearing, request, writ or different procedure of a court or wilful
break of an undertaking given to a court.22

i) Appeal

19 Sodhi sukhdev singh v. chief justice, (1954) SCR 454 (563) : AIR 1954 SC 186. In re : Ajay Kumar Pandey,
(1996)6 SCC 510 (para 45) :AIR 1997 SC 260

20 Pirtampal v. High court of M.P AIR 1992 sc 904 :1993 supp. (1) SCC 529,

21 Delhi judicial service assn. V. State of Gujarat (1991) 4 sec 406

22 Chairman, Ludhiana Improvement Trust v. Kanwaljit Singh (Dr.) v. K.K.sethi, (1998) 8 SCC 640.

11 | P a g e
 The Appellant Court does not interfere or deals with any order in contempt proceeding unless the
order is totally wicked.23

ii) Practice and Procedure

In civil contempt the power under this article is a abstract power. The court may proceed
suo motu or on the petition of an advocate of the court.24 Delhi development authority v. Skipper
construction in this case respondents violating directions of Court- Also filing suit in High Court in
respect of same subject matter regarding which their special leave petition had been dismissed -Suo
Motu notice to respondents by Court-Contemnors tendering apology-held, respondents' actions
amounted to Contempt of Court- Apology is not a weapon of defence forged to purge guilt of offences
-Contemnors sentenced to simple imprisonment-However, sentence deferred subject to conditions.
Held Abuse of the process of court calculated to hamper the due course of judicial proceeding or the
orderly administration of justice is a contempt of court. The contemner is not allowed to examine
witnesses in defence to prove that his allegation is corruption.25 At the same time it must be reasonable26
and the notice must be given to the contemner and give opportunity to answer to the charge about
him.27There is no need to draw up any formal charge, but sufficient particular must be given.28the
contempt jurisdiction cannot be invoked to destroy personal vengeance against the alleged contemner.29

SHRI SANJIV DATTA, DEPUTY SECRETARY,MINISTRY OF INFORMATION &

BROADCASTING30
Suo moto contempt notice issued to a public servant and his advocates Affidavit filed in the
Supreme Court containing allegations against the Court Allegations made with intention of casting

23 N.C. Das v. M.a. Mohsin, (1997) 7 SCC 438 (para 2).

24 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SKIPPER CONSTRUCTION [1995 SCC (3) 507]

25 Daphtary, C.K. v. Gupta, o.p., AIR 1971 SC 1132 (1146, 1149, 1151)): (1971) 1 SCC 626

26 Cf. Suhdev Singh Sodhi v. Chief justice, (1954) SCR 454 (453): AIR 1954 SC 186

27 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SKIPPER CONSTRUCTION [1995 SCC (3) 507]

28 N.C. Das v. M.a. Mohsin, (1997) 7 SCC 438 (para 3).

29 N.C. Das v. M.A. Mohsin, (1997) 7 SCC 439 (para 3)

30 [1995 SCC (3) 619]

12 | P a g e
aspersions on the Court and attributing motives to it Accusing the Court of making mockery of
established policy of Government of India by permitting a foreign agency to undertake broadcasting
from India against national interest thereby undermining sovereignty of the nation-Unconditional
apology of public servant not accepted-Allegations made by the contemnor were intentional- Made with
full knowledge of its grave implications and therefore has potentiality of mischief-If not curbed firmly,
may assume proportion grave enough to sabotage the rule of law. Unconditional apology of advocates-
Accepted for want of knowledge of allegations. (Officers-let your mind and not the heart speak)
Where improper for judge of high court it direct that to appeal to the supreme court it is
final appeal the supreme court should not remand the appeal to the single judge in the supreme court or
to the high court. This direction indicate proper judicial discipline and amount to innovication of a
procedure unknown law.31however where the contemners had wilfully disobeyed the order of apex court
in view of one of the contemner age a fine of Rs 50000/- was imposed on he and the other was
sentenced to simple imprisonment of three months and a fine of Rs 50000/- also was imposed on her.32

DELHI JUDICIAL SERVICE ASSOCIATION Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT 33

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad, Gujarat--Assaulted, arrested on flimsy grounds,
handcuffed, tied with rope, photographs taken and published by Police Officers--Held constituted clear
case of criminal contempt--Contemnors-punishment Quantum of punishment determined according to
degree and extent of part played by each contemnor Guidelines laid down by Supreme Court in case of
arrest and detention of a Judicial Officer--To be followed by State Governments as well as High Courts--
Judicial Officer not to visit Police Station Except in connection with official and judicial duties and with
prior intimation to District and Sessions Judge.

iii) Apology

The supreme court did not accept the conditional apology of the contemner to avoid conviction
so also where an advocate accused had slapped on the face of magistrate for rejecting his application for
exemption from personal appearance.34

Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law, a contempt of court may be
punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may
extend to two thousand rupees, or with both. Provided that the accused may be discharged or the
punishment awarded may be remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the court. the
apology is shall not rejected on the ground that it is qualified or conditional if the accused make it
bonafide it in sec12.

31 Chetak construction Ltd v. Om Praksh, (1998) 4 SCC 438 (para 3)

32 David Jude v. Hannah Grace Jude, (2003) 10 SCC 760-66 (paras 18 and 19)

33 AIR 1991 SC 2176 :1991 SCC (4) 406

34 Sohan Lal Gupta v. Asha Devi Gupta, (2003) 7 SCC 492, 510-11 (para 50-52):AIR 2004 SC 856.

13 | P a g e
 Unable to secure an ad-interim stay in favour of his client, the appellant, a practicing Advocate, uttered
certain words imputing motives to the Sub-Judge in refusing to grant the stay.- Had the effect of
scandalizing the Court and impairing confidence of public in Court Hence guilty of contempt Apology-
Tendering of Not to serve as mere defense against rigors of law- Should reflect remorse and contrition
of contemnor- Tendering 'unqualified apology' in case Court finds him guilty Not sincere-Contemnor
addicted to use of contemptuous language against Judges and tendering apology Apology used merely a
device to escape Not to be accepted--Use of contempt jurisdiction against erring members of legal
profession- Courts are slow in the hope that Bar Councils will take care to maintain ethical norms-
Decline in ethical values in the profession Arrest of Timely action by Bar Councils Need for held It is
well-settled that an apology is not a weapon of defence to purge the guilty of their offence; nor is it
intended to operate as a universal panacea, but it is intended to be evidence of real contriteness. 35

iv) Judicial restraint

True the judge should not be hypersensitive but that does not mean and imply that
they ought to maintain angelic silence also. Immaterial it is as to the person but the seat of justice need
protection. It is the image of the judicial system which needs production. The majestry of the court shall
have to be maintained and there ought not to be any compromise or leniency in the regard.36

v) Opportunity to purge

Where a state government had committed any contempt to the supreme court by not compling
with its order the court granted and opportunity to the government to puge the contempt by complying
with the same and directed the contempt petition to remain pending.37

CHAPTER IV

1 a)Essentials of civil contempt of court

The civil contempt of court is making the valid court orders and give knowledge of the order by
respondent where the ability of the respondent to render the compliance and wilfully disobedience of
the order.

b)Limitation

The Limitation period for activities of hatred has been talked about under Section 20 of the Contempt of
Courts Act of 1971 and is a time of one year from the date on which the disdain is asserted to have been
conferred.

35 M.b. sanghi, Advocate v. High court of Punjab and Haryana AIR 1991 SC 1834:1991(3)SCC 600

36 Prem surana v. Additional Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, (2002) 6 SCC 722, 726,727 (para 10): AIR 2002 SC
2956

37 Nair service society v. S.P. Anand, (1998) 6 scc 466 (para 61-63) :AIR 2007 SC 2891.

14 | P a g e
Cognizance of criminal contempt in other cases
In the case of a criminal contempt other than a contempt referred to sec 14, the supreme court or
high court may take action on its own motion or motion made by advocate general and any person with
the consent in writing of advocate general .

In the case of any criminal contempt of a subordinate court, the High Court may take action on a
reference made to it by the subordinate court or on a motion made by the Advocate-General or, in
relation to a Union territory, by such Law Officer as the Central Government may, by notification in the
Official Gazette, specify in this behalf. [Sec.15]

Procedure after cognizance

Notice of every proceeding under section 15 shall be served personally on the person
charged, unless the court for reasons to be recorded directs otherwise [Sec.17] . the procedure to decide
the contempt of court is hearing of cases of criminal contempt to be by benches where every cases of
criminal contempt under sec 15 shall heard and determined by bench not less than two judge sec 18.
There is apples for the high court decision that order of decision is heard by bench to supreme court sec
19. With in thirty days the case apple to bench of the high court and in case of an apple to the supreme
court is within sixty days it from the date of the order appealed against

Certificate for appeal to supreme court

Article 134 A the constitution 44th amended art 132, 133,and 135 and inserted a new
article 134 A for regulating the grand of certificate for appeal to the supreme court by the high court . the
object of this new provision to avoid delay in cases going to the supreme court in appal from the
judgement, decree, final, order or sentence of the High court

Criminal Contempt
Under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, criminal disdain has been characterized
as the production (whether by words, talked or composed, or by signs, or by obvious representation, or
something else) of any matter or the doing of whatever other demonstration at all which:

(i) Scandalizes or has a tendency to outrage, or brings or tends down to bring down the power of, any
court.38

(ii) Prejudices, or meddles or has a tendency to meddle with the proper method of any legal continuing,
or

38 AIR 1971 sc 1132 (para 61,66,69)(1971) 1 SCC 626.

15 | P a g e
(iii) Interferes or has a tendency to meddle with, or impedes or has a tendency to deter, the organization
of equity in some other way.

(a) 'High Court' implies the high court for a state or a union region and incorporates the court of the
legal chief in any union domain.

There can be doubtlessly the motivation behind hatred locale is to maintain the superbness and pride of
law courts and their picture in the brains of people in general is no chance whittled down. On the off
chance that by unyielding words or works the regular man is directed to lose his regard for the judge
acting in the release of his legal obligations, then the certainty rested in the courts is discourteously
shaken and the wrongdoer should be rebuffed. Basically of law of disdain is the defender of the seat of
equity more than the individual sitting of the judge sitting in that seat.

Third party
The high court has power to try offences is committed or offenders found outside jurisdiction sec 11. An
third party to the procedure might be liable of contempt of court on the off chance that they have a
section to play in the offense.

A newspaper published a news item that two sons of a Supreme Court Judge had been allotted petrol
pumps by the Minister out of his discretionary quota. However, on verification the news was found to be
incorrect. The Court held the printer, publisher, editor and the reporter guilty of the contempt of the
court. None of them took the necessary care in evaluating the correctness and credibility of the
information published by them as a news, item in the newspaper in respect of the allegation of a very
serious nature causing an embarrassment to the
Court.39

In LED Builders Pty Ltd v Eagles Homes Pty Ltd 40

"It is not important to demonstrate that a man who has supported and abetted a disdain of court
was presented with the request ruptured. It is important to demonstrate just that the individual tried to be
made at risk knew of the request."

CONCLUSION
The high court are a court of record under the supreme court where the district court not have court
of record it not mentioned in any provision under the constitution. The court of record has power to
punish for its contempt.
Contempt of court is committed when a court is scandalised by casting unwarranted, uncalled
for and unjusticified aspersions on the integrity, ability, impartiality or fairness of judge in the discharge
of his judicial function as it amount to an interference with the due course of administration of justice.
Charging the judiciary as an instrument of oppression and the judge as guided and dominated by
class hatred instinctively favouring the rich against the poor has been held to constitute contempt of

39 (1996) 6 SCC 466.

40 ([1999] FCA 1213)

16 | P a g e
court as these words weaken the authority of law and law court and have the effect of lowering the
prestige of judges and courts in the eyes of the people.
A fair reasonable, temperate and legitimate criticism of the judiciary or of the conduct of a judge in his
judicial capacity is permissible.
The power to punish for contempt, large as it is ,is not invoked very frequently and as the court has
itself observed it should be exercised cautiously, wisely and with circumspection. On occasion, factor
which have been considered sufficient to warrant a lesser punishment, in one case have not drawn a
similar response in another. Thus even when criminal contempt was found established and the
contemnor had not shown any repentance or regret or remorse a symbolic punishment of
imprisonment for one day and a fine of Rs. 2000/- was imposed keeping in mind that the respondent
was a women. In a later case however a woman who was found guilty of contempt was a woman. In a
later case however, a women who was found guilty of contempt was sentenced to undergo
imprisonment. The court does not use its power to punish for contempt unless there is real prejudice
which can be regarded as sub stantial interference with the due course of justice.

17 | P a g e
18 | P a g e