Skip to main content

Contempt of Court

 CONTEMPT OF COURT

The Supreme Court of India 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 as prescribed in the Article 129 of the Constitution of India. The Contempt of Court is of two types: Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt.

  1. Civil contempt of courts (willful disobedience of the orders of the Court)

Civil contempt of court most often happens when someone fails to adhere to an order from the court, resulting, injury to a private party's rights.

For example, failure to pay court ordered child support can lead to punishment for civil contempt.

  1. Criminal Contempt of Court

  • 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

  • Scandalizes or tends to scandalize, 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

  • Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.

If any person acts in these ways he is liable under contempt of the Court Act, 1971.

  • Hiralal dixit v. State of UP

In this case, the SC has given elaborative definitions for the contempt of court:

  • An attempt by one party to prejudice the court against the other party to the action.

  • To stir up public feelings on the question pending for decision before the Court.

  • To try to influence the judge in favour of himself.

  • An attempt to affect the minds of the judges and to deflect them from performing their duty by flattering or wild threat, etc.

  • An act or publication which scandalizes the court attributing dishonesty, to a judge in discharging his functions (or) willful disobedience of orders of court is called contempt of court.

  • In Re: The Editor, Printer, Publisher, Times of India, Bombay & Delhi v. Arabinda Bose & Another

An article that is criticizing the SC decision and attributing improper motives to the judges, seeking to create an impression in the public mind that the SC Judges Act on extraneous considerations, held to be constituted contempt of court.

  • Delhi Judicial Service Association v. State of Gujarat and Others

One judicial magistrate was taken by the police after forcefully pouring alcohol in his mouth and took him to medical examination in the Government Hospital. The particular Munsiff Magistrate was hand cuffed by the police and taken to the police station. The police officer has not informed it to the district judge or HC. All these acts of the police are nothing but with a motivation to scandalize the reputation of the judge who is very ferocious & honestly working. So Delhi Judicial Service Association filed a case against this incident. The SC has taken it very seriously. They contended that this is only a subject and the constitutional provisions didn't attract the same, but the court said that contempt of court is for all not for only SC. SC punished all 5 officers including an IPS officer and sent to jail because of their actions, which amount to contempt of court.

  • Juhi Chawla v. Science and Engineering Research Board (5G Case)

Not only the parties to the suit any person can be prosecuted for contempt of court proceedings including a judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially shall also be liable for contempt of his own court or of any other court in the same manner.

In this 5G case, Juhi Chawla has shared the video conferencing link of the court on her social media accounts. While the proceedings were going on some unknown miscreants started singing the song ''Ghoonghat ki aad se" from Juhi Chawla’s movie. Sometime later, the same was repeated and after third time, the judge directed the Delhi Police that the person should be identified and a contempt notice be issued.


Contempt of Court by Velanati Jyothirmai at Lex Cliq
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more