Salient features of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971

Words spoken or written which obstruct or tend to obstruct the administration of justice can be contempt. Article 129 and 215 give the power of contempt of court to higher judiciary. Somehow it might appear that it limits the freedom granted by article 19(1) (a). But the whole idea behind continuing with this colonial act is that people do have the right to criticize judges but they should not go to the extent of making the functioning of judiciary difficult.

The Act and its features:

The “contempt of court” can be either civil contempt or criminal contempt;
(a) Civil contempt: 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
(b) Criminal contempt: publication (whether by words. spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which-
(i) Scandalizes or tends to scandalize, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court
(ii) Prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding
(iii) Interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner

Innocent publication and distribution of matter not contempt:

(1) A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court

-on the ground that he has published (whether by words spoken or written or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise) any matter which interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the course of justice in connection with any civil or criminal proceeding pending at the time of publication, if at that time he had no reasonable grounds for believing that the proceeding was pending at that time of publishing he had no reasonable grounds for believing that the proceeding was pending.

-in connection with any civil or criminal proceeding which is not pending at the time of publication shall not be deemed to constitute contempt of court.

-he has distributed a publication containing any objectionable matter and at the time of distribution he had no reasonable grounds for believing that it contained or was likely to contain any such matter: Provided that this sub-section shall not apply in respect of the distribution of:
(i) any publication which is a book or paper printed or published otherwise than in conformity with the rules contained in section 3 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 ;(25 of 1867)
(ii) Any publication which is a newspaper published otherwise than in conformity with the rules contained in section 5 of the said Act. It includes a pending judicial proceeding, when the charge-sheet or challan is filed, or when the court issues summons or warrant. The limitations apply until it is heard and finally decided.

Fair and accurate report of judicial proceeding not contempt
A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding or any stage thereof.

Fair criticism of judicial act not contempt:
A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing any fair comment on the merits of any case which has been heard and finally decided.

Complaint against presiding officers of subordinate courts when not contempt:
A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court in respect of any statement made by him in good faith concerning the presiding officer of any subordinate court to- (a) any other subordinate court, or (b) the High Court, to which it is subordinate.

Publication of information relating to proceedings in chambers or in camera not contempt except in certain cases:
(1) A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing a fair and a accurate report of a judicial proceeding before any court sitting in chambers or in camera except in the following cases, that is to say,-
(a) Where the publication is contrary to the provisions of any enactment for the time being in force;
(b) Where the court, on grounds of public policy or in exercise of any power vested in it, expressly prohibits the publication of all information relating to the proceeding or of information of the description which is published;
(c) Where the court sits in chambers or in camera for reasons connected with public order or the security of the State, the publication of information relating to those proceedings;
(d) Where the information relates to a secret process, discovery or invention which is an issue in the proceedings.

(2) A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing the text or a fair and accurate summary of the whole, or any part, of an order made by a court sitting in chambers or in camera, unless the court has expressly prohibited the publication thereof on grounds of public policy, or for reasons connected with public order or the security of the State, or on the ground that it contains information relating to a secret process, discovery or invention, or in exercise of any power vested in it.

Power of High Court to punish contempt of subordinate courts:

Every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it as it has in respect of contempt of itself: Provided that no High Court shall take cognizance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).

Power of High Court to try offences committed or offenders found outside jurisdiction:
A High Court shall have jurisdiction to inquire into or try contempt of itself or of any court subordinate to it, whether the contempt is alleged to have been committed within or outside the local limits of its jurisdiction, and whether the person alleged to be guilty of contempt is within or outside such limits.

Punishment for contempt of court:

(1) A contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for up to six months, or with fine up to two thousand rupees, or with both. The accused may be discharged or the punishment awarded may be remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the court. The court, if it feels that the ends of justice will not be met without imprisonment may direct that he be detained in a civil prison.

(2) In case of contempt committed by a company, if it is proved that the contempt has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such an officer officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of the contempt and such a person may also be punished.

Contempt not punishable in certain cases:

The court is not supposed to impose a sentence under this unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends substantially to interfere with the due course of justice.

Procedure where contempt is in the face of the Supreme Court or a High Court:

- When the court is of the opinion that a person has committed contempt in its presence or hearing, the Court may cause such person to be detained in custody.
- As early as possible thereafter the guilty shall be informed in writing of the contempt with which he is charged with an opportunity to make his defence to the charge.
- After the hearing the court may proceedto determine the matter of the charge; and make such order for the punishment or discharge, as may be just.
- Pending the determination of the charge, the Court may direct that the person be detained in such custody as it may specify: Provided that he shall be released on bail, if a bond for such sum of money as the Court thinks sufficient is executed with or without sureties.

Cognizance of criminal contempt in other cases:

(1) In the case of a criminal contempt the Supreme Court or the High Court may take action on its own motion or on a motion made by (a) the Advocate-General, or (b) any other person, with the consent in writing of the Advocate General or Law Officer (in case of some Union Territory).

(2) 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 Law.

Contempt by judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially:

(1) A judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially is also liable for contempt of his own court or of any other court in the same manner as any other individual and the provisions of this Act shall applies to them as well accordingly.

(2) Although this doesn’t apply to any observations or remarks made regarding a subordinate court in an appeal or revision pending before such judge, magistrate or other person against the order or judgment of the subordinate court.

Limitation for actions for contempt:

A court can initiate contempt proceedings only within a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.

Act not to apply to Nyaya Panchyats or other village courts:

This Act does not apply to contempt of Nyaya Panchayats or other village courts.

Power of Supreme Court and High Courts to make rules:

The Supreme Court or any High Court may make rules, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, providing for any matter relating to its procedure.

Looking at the act from the present context:

In the Contempt of Courts Act 1952, there was no definition of ‘contempt’. When the definition was introduced by the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 (vide section 2), there was no definition of what constitutes scandalizing the court, or what prejudices or interferes with the course of justice. What was regarded as scandalous, or prejudice or interfering earlier may not be regarded as scandalous today.
To quote Supreme Court judge Markandeya Katju, ‘In a democracy, the object of this act is not to protect the dignity of courts but to protect the administration of justice.
The Contempt of Courts Amendment Act, 2006, has introduced a new section 13(b) that states: “The court may permit, in any proceedings for contempt of court, justification by truth as a valid defece if it is satisfied that it is in public interest and request for said defence is bona fide.” The amendment is the right culmination of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.