26-08-2016, 02:07 PM
1444647508-Contemptedited.rtf (Size: 400.8 KB / Downloads: 4)
INTRODUCTION
After discussing concept, historical background and constitutional aspect in the proceeding chapters, an attempt has been made in this chapter to discuss in detail the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Rule of Law is the basic principle of governance of any civilized and democratic society. The principle asserts supremacy of law bringing under its purview everyone, individuals and institutions at par without any subjective discretion.
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. An independent or impartial Judiciary is the sine qua non of a healthy society. It is the last resort for the common people of a country, as they repose their ultimate faith in it to get justice. Therefore, it is essential for the Judiciary to be protected from all sorts of evil likely to affect the administration of justice. For better protection and preservation of prestige and dignity of the courts, the law on contempt of court has evolved. So, broadly speaking, this law helps the courts in discharging justice keeping its stand supreme in the eye of society. Actually this law aims at ensuring the administration of justice by courts in the society. The essence of contempt is action or inaction amounting to an interference with or obstruction to or having a tendency to interfere with or to obstruct the due Administration of Justice.
The House of Lords in Attorney General v. Times Newspapers Ltd. , has rightly enumerated threefold purposes of the law of contempt: (i) to enable the parties to litigation and the witnesses to come before the Court without outside interference; (ii) to enable the Courts to try cases without such interference; and (iii) to ensure that authority and administration of law are maintained.
LEGISLATIVE MEASURES RELATING TO CONTEMPT IN INDIA
In India, almost all the laws replicate the English Statutes and contempt law is no exception to it. The brief narration of legislative measures of the law of contempt of court in India from the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 to the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is useful for the purpose of present study.
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1926
In India there was no statutory law of contempt till 1926. Before 1926, the law of contempt in India followed in entirely, British corresponding law which regulated superior courts of record. The High Courts in India which were courts of record often adopted British legal principles enunciated in regard to contempt law. The first legislation to deal with contempt of courts in our country received statutory recognition in the form of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926.
1.2.2 THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1952
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1952, repealed the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 and consolidated the provisions relating to the law of contempt so as to make it applicable to the High Courts. No new powers were vested in the Courts. It merely recognised, defined and limited the powers that already existed. This Act made two significant departures from the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926. First, the expression "High Court'' was defined to include the Courts of Judicial Commissioner which had been excluded from the purview of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 and secondly, the High Courts, including the Court of a Judicial Commissioner, were conferred jurisdiction to inquire into and „try contempt of itself or of any Court subordinate to it‟.
HISTORY OF THE COTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971
The Sanyal Committee made a comprehensive examination of the law and problems relating to contempt of court in comparison with various foreign countries. Evaluating the law relating to contempt, the doyen of the Indian Bar Mr. Fali Nariman in his speech said the offence of scandalizing the court is a mercurial jurisdiction in which there are no rules and no constraints. He and other were perfectly correct in saying there should be certainty in the law, and not uncertainty. After all, the citizen should know where he or she stands.
.
SCOPE OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT
It is very much necessary to assess the scope of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, because the title of the Act often misleads people to think that this piece of legislation tends to protect the court and the fraternity of lawyers and judges, thereby keeping them above law. Given that the judiciary is both the prosecutor and the adjudicator, it often leads this legislation to be misconstrued as a veil of protection for the courts from external criticism. Infact, if it were so, then it would be nothing but an abuse of the powers of the judiciary and a neglect of the very ideal of justice that it wishes to protect. The punishment under the contempt law is inflicted not for the purpose of protecting either the court as whole or individual judges from a repetition of the attack but of protecting the public. Thus, contrary to the aforementioned common perception, this act in no way hands over superfluous power to the judiciary. Moreover, it must be remembered that the power and jurisdiction of the courts under this act falls under extra-ordinary jurisdiction alone and this acts as a check on the judiciary.
PROVISIONS OF THE COTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971
This Act was enacted to define and limit the powers of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto. Thus, the new Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been enacted in order to remove doubts which had arisen as to the powers of a High Court.
1.3.2 Section 1: Short title and extent
Section 1 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 states the short title and extent of the Act. This Act may be called the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and it extends to the whole of India, provided that it shall not apply to the state of Jammu and Kashmir except to the extent to which the provisions of this Act relate to contempt of the Supreme Court. 30 In Shakuntala Sahadevram Tewari v. Hemchand M.Singhania, the Court held that the law of contempt of courts is for keeping the administration of justice pure and undefiled. While the dignity of the court is to be maintained at all costs, the contempt jurisdiction, which is of a special nature, should be sparingly used.
1.3.3 Section 2: Definitions
(i) Contempt of Court
In Section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, there are four definitions viz., 'Contempt of Court', 'Civil Contempt' 'Criminal Contempt' and 'High Court'. It was for the first time that the words 'Contempt of Court' had been defined in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Before the enactment of the present Act the term 'Contempt of Court' was not defined. It was considered proper that a definition may be assigned to the term and distinction may be made between civil contempt and criminal contempt. With this view the term 'Contempt of Court' was defined under Section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, mean civil contempt and criminal contempt.
In Queen v. Gray, it was held that the law relating to contempt of court is well settled as 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. It would be appropriate to examine and analyse some landmark judgments of the Apex Court relating to contempt of court to know its scope and area.