DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

PROJECT
PROFESSIONAL EHTICS AND PROFESSIONAL
ACCOUNTANCY

TOPIC: TWO DEFENCES OF CRIMINAL CONTEMPT

Submitted To:- Submitted By:-

Prof. Bayola Sir Anshu Singh
(2014015)

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to show sincere gratitude to all academic and administrative staff of
DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY who
extended their help in completion of project work.
Secondly, I would also like to thank my parents and friends who helped me a lot in
finishing this project within the limited time.

2
 CONTENTS

S.no. Chapters Pages

1
INTRODUCTION 4

2
CATEGORIES OF CONTEMPT OF COURT 4

3
TWO DEFENCES FOR CRIMINAL CONTEMPT 5

4
INNOCENT PUBLICATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF MATTER 5
(SECTION 3)
5
FAIR CRITICISM OF A JUDICIAL ACT OR ANY 7
PROCEEDINGS (SECTION 5)
6
CASE LAWS 8

7
CONCLUSION 15

8
BIBLIOGRAPHY 16

3
 INTRODUCTION

MEANING OF CONTEMPT
Contempt is an act of deliberate disobedience or disregard for the laws, regulations, or dignity of
a public authority, such as a court or legislative body. In legal language, contempt states to any
intentional disobedience to, or disregard of, a court order or any misbehavior in the existence of a
court; action that hinders with a judge's ability to order justice or that insults the dignity of the
court1. There are essentially two types of contempt:
a) Contempt in facie disrespect to the decorum of the court (being impolite, disrespectful to
the judge or other attorneys or causing a trouble in the courtroom, mainly after being
cautioned by the judge)
b) Contempt ex facie intentional failure to follow an order of the court. Failure to make a
court-ordered payment, such as maintenance, may result in a finding of contempt. The
court's authority to punish for contempt includes fines and/or jail time. Since the judge has
discretion to control the courtroom, contempt citations are usually not appealable unless
the total fine or jail time is excessive.2

CATEGORIES OF CONTEMPT OF COURT

1) Civil contempt-
According to section 2 (b) of The Contempt of court Act, 1971, civil contempt means
"willful disobedience to any judgement, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a
court or willful breach of an undertaking given to the Court.” Thus civil contempt contains
violating the orders and process of the court. Civil contempt includes only the intentional
disobedience of the court’s order or breach of undertaking given to the court. The purpose of the
proceeding for the civil contempt is not only to penalize the container but also to exercise
obedience and enforcement to the order of the court.

1
Richard C. Brautigam, constitutional challenge to the contempt power, 60, Geo.LJ, 1972, 1513 at 1513
2
John Charles Fox “The Nature of Contempt of Court” 37 L.Q.R., 191, 194 (1921)

4
2) Criminal contempt
According to Section 2(c) of The Contempt of courts Act, 1971, "criminal contempt" means the
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) scandalize or tends to scandalize, or lower or tends to lower, the authority of any Court; or
II) Prejudice or interfere or tents to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or
III) Interface or tends to interfere with or obstructs, tends to obstruct, the administration of justice
in any other manner.3

TWO DEFENCES FOR CRIMINAL CONTEMPT

I) Innocent publication and distribution of matter (Section 3):

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 criminal proceeding pending at that time of publication, if at that time he had no
reasonable grounds for believing that the proceeding was pending4.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act or any
other law for the time being in force, the publication of any such matter as is mentioned in sub-
section (1) in connection with criminal proceeding which is not pending at the time of publication
shall not be deemed to constitute contempt of court.
A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court on the ground that he has circulated a publication
comprising any such matter as is mentioned in sub-section (1), if at the time of circulation he had
no reasonable grounds for believing that it contained or was likely to contain any such matter as
aforesaid:
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

3
In 1962 a Committee headed by H.N. Sanyal, the then Solicitor General of India, was appointed by the
Government of India to review and suggest modifications in the law of contempt of court. The Committee in its
report stated the summary jurisdiction to punish for contempt of court.
4
Section 3 of Contempt of court Act, 1971.

5
in section 3 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 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 substitutes the strict liability rule in the case of publication of any matter which interferes or
tends to interfere with or obstructs or tends to obstruct the course of justice in a pending
proceeding, by enabling the person charged to establish that in the facts and circumstances of the
case he had no reason to believe that any proceeding referable to the publication was pending. It
is clear that the facts and circumstances must be such that they do not constitute reasonable grounds
for believing are pending so far as the person charged is concerned.
It may be noted that the protection under sub-section (1) is made available to a person who has
published the offending matter. It is submitted that although the word “published” has been used,
the defence would be available to the speaker, or the writer, or the maker of a Sign or visible
representation etc. In other words, the defence is not limited to the publisher in the sense that the
said expression is used in the context of publication of books, magazines, newspapers etc. It would
be unreasonable to exclude from the operation of the protection authors or printers solely on the
ground that they are strictly not publishers as the term is generally understood. But the defence
cannot be urged by those who wilfully close their eyes to any relevant facts5.
Termination of Proceedings6: The explanation also clarifies at what stage the proceedings
terminate. It clearly provides that the proceedings shall be deemed to continue to be pending until
it is heard and finally decided. In a case where an appeal or revision is competent, until the appeal
or revision is heard and finally decided or where no appeal or revision is preferred until the period
of limitation prescribed for such appeal or revision has expired. Actual pendency of an appeal or
revision is not necessary. Thus, when a letter was written containing serious allegations against a
Presiding Officer of the Court of an Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) after the dismissal of
a complaint, it was held that proceedings must be deemed to be pending because the limitation for
filing a revision against the dismissal had not expired and whether or not the remedy of revision
was availed of was immaterial. Termination of proceedings is also explained by explanation (b) to
section 3. It clearly provides that after a judicial proceeding has been heard and finally decided, it
shall not be considered to be pending. In other words, proceedings for execution are delinked from

5
Prabhakar Laxman Mokashi v Sadanand Trimbak Yardi, 1975
6
AIR 1978 SC 921 at p. 926

6
the main proceeding and are not treated as pending proceedings for the purpose of section 3 of the
Act.

II) Fair criticism of a judicial act or any proceedings (section 5)7

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. This section delimits the scope of criticism
of the merits of a case which has been heard and finally decided. And provided a person operates
within those limits, he will be immune. The expression “merits of any case” indicates that the
operation of the section is not confined to judgment only. In other words, a fair comment on the
merits of a case after it has been heard and finally decided but before judgment is delivered is
covered by this section. The heading of the section refers to “fair criticism” whereas in the section
itself the expression used is “fair comment”. A harmonious reading of the heading and the text of
the section would mean that the criticism must be a fair comment in order to avail of the protection
given by the section.
But it needs to be pointed out that the commentary on scandalising in court [S.2(c)(i)] and
interferences with judicial proceedings [S.2(c)(ii)] and administration of justice [S.2(c)(iii)]
involving prejudgment situations may also be useful in testing the fariness of comments8.

7
Section 5 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971
8
Sanyal Committee Report, p.44, paras 3.1, 3.2

7
 CASE LAWS
1. RACHAPUDI SUBBA RAO V. ADVOCATE GENERAL, ANDHRA PRADESH9
FACTS
The appellant issued notice to the Additional Sub Judge alleging that he created new facts with
bad intention and with bad faith. The Additional Sub Judge submitted this notice to the High Court
so that High Court can take some action against him. At the instance of the High Court the
Advocate General instituted contempt proceedings against the appellant.
ISSUE
Whether the language used in the notice fell within the exception of Section 3?
REASONING
Section 3 is an exception to those categories of "criminal contempt" which fall under sub- clause
(ii) and to certain categories of "criminal contempt" which come under sub-clause (iii) of Section
2(c), but not to that category of contempt which falls under sub-clause(i) of Section 2(c). This is
clear from a comparison of the language of section 3(1) with that of Section 2(c). There are no
words in Section 3 which may constitute "criminal contempt" which would fall within sub-clause
(i) of the definition given in Section 2(c). Subsection (2) of Section 3 expressly limits its operation
to those classes of contempt which are referred to in sub-section (1). Section 3(2) therefore, is not
applicable to that category of contempt which falls under sub-clause (i) of Section 2(c).
OBSERVATION
It can be clearly seen that Section 3(2) expressly limits its operation to those classes of contempt
which are referred in sub section (1).

2. PRABHAKAR LAXMAN MOKASHI V. SADANAND TRIMBAK YARDI10

FACTS
After a riot took place in Vikhroli on September 2, 1972, several person were arrested on suspicion
of being involved in the crime. Meeting was held and it was found that speeches given at the
meeting are of that nature that it may cause hindrance in giving justice in the case against the

9
AIR 1981 SC 755
10
1975 Cri LJ 531

8
arrested persons. The Assistant Commissioner of Police Shri P.L. Mokashi, 'G' Division, filed an
application before the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, 19th Court, Bombay, on October
18, 1972.
ISSUE
Whether publication of matter of the nature specified in sub section (1) in relation to imminent
proceedings as opposed to pending proceeding will amount to contempt or not?
DECISION
Sub-section (2) is rather involved in its construction and makes it clear that, when a matter is not
pending, publication of any matter which is otherwise may constitute contempt and which has
already been described in Sub-section (7) of Section 3, is still not to be considered to establish
contempt of Court. In comprehensive way, this sub-section lays down that the publication of matter
which might otherwise fall within the definition of contempt of Court, is still granted a certain
exemption if the proceeding was not pending at the time of its publication.
OBSERVATION
It is observed that when a matter is not pending then publication of any matter which is otherwise
may constitute contempt is still not to be considered to establish contempt of court

3. RAMA DAYAL MARKARHA V. STATE OF MP (1978)11

FACTS
The appellant a Senior Practicing Advocate in Umaria District Sahdol, Madhya Pradesh was
convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. The appellant appeared on behalf of some
accused persons in a criminal trial before the Additional District Magistrate. The accused were
convicted by the Magistrate. They filed an appeal which, was allowed by the Additional Sessions
Judge. Then he published a pamphlet where he wrote about the improper motive of the learned
Magistrate in deciding the case. The appellant did not question the authorship and publication of
the pamphlet. In his defence he said that what he did was merely publishing a fair comment on the
merits of a criminal case and therefore he was entitled to the benefit of S. 5 of the Act. It was also
contended that even if the Court came to the conclusion that he was guilty of contempt of court no
sentence should be imposed upon him because the publication is not likely to substantially interfere

11
AIR 1978 SC 921 at p. 926

9
or would tend substantially to interfere with the due course of justice and therefore, is entitled to
benefit of s.3.
ISSUE
Whether he was entitled to get benefit under section 3?
DECISION
Court held that Explanation given in s. 3 would clearly show that the, proceeding either civil or
criminal shall be deemed to continue to be pending until it is heard and finally decided. It can be
said that in a case where an appeal or revision is competent, until the appeal or revision is heard
and finally decided or, where no appeal or revision is preferred, until the period of limitation
prescribed for such appeal or revision has expired.
OBSERVATION
It is observed that proceeding either civil or criminal shall be deemed to continue to be pending
until it is heard and finally decided.

4. STATE V. S.N. DIKSHIT (1973)12

FACTS
Opposite party claims to be the Secretary of the Electric Workers' Union. Etawah brought a
complaint against Sri N. P. Dutta. Chief Engineer of the Western -U. P. Electric Supply Co. Ltd.
Etawah, for offences under Sections 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. These proceedings
under the Contempt of Courts Act, were started at the instance of the District Judge, Etawah arising
out of an application made by the Additional District "Magistrate (Judicial) Sri Ghyasuddin
Ahmad to the Registrar of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
ISUUE
Whether the person is entitled to the benefit of Section 3(2) when the proceeding was pending?
DECISION
Court held that it can be clearly seen that after a proceeding has apparently concluded it shall be
theoretically pending where an appeal or revision is competent until the appeal or revision is heard
and finally decided or where no appeal or revision is preferred. until the period of limitation
prescribed for such appeal or revision has expired. The third complaint of the opposite party had

12
1973 Cri LJ 1211 at p. 1215

10
been dismissed on the 15th September, 1971, i.e. only a day before the letter was written. The
limitation for filing the revision against the said order was 30 days which had not expired and the
opposite party could have taken the remedy. The fact whether he actually adopted to that remedy
or not is wholly immaterial. Since the limitation for filing the revision had not expired and the
proceedings in question must be held to be pending in the court of the A. D. M. (J). He is not
entitled to the benefit under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 as we have said that the proceeding was
pending at the time when the letter was written.
OBSERVATION
It is observed that the fact whether he actually adopted to that remedy or not is wholly immaterial,
Since the limitation for filing the revision had not expired.

5. AMBARD V. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO13

The appeal was filed by special leave from an order of the Supreme Court of Trinidad and Tobago
ordering the appellant to pay a fine £25. If he will not pay then he will be imprisoned for one month
for contempt of Court, and further ordering him to pay the costs of the proceedings for the solicitor.
ISSUE
Whether, as contended by the respondent, the Privy Council is incompetent to entertain an appeal
from an order of a Court of Record imposing a penalty for contempt of Court?
DECISION
Appeal was allowed and court held that they are satisfied to leave to public opinion attacks or
comments, insulting or immoral to them. But it must be considered that in small colonies, mainly
consisting of coloured populations, the implementation in proper cases for sentencing a person for
contempt of Court for attacks on the Court may be absolutely essential to preserve in such a
community the respect for the Court.

13
AIR 1936 PC 141

11
 6. SANJIV DATTA CASE14
FACTS
Cricket association of Bengal made a mockery of the established policy of government of India by
permitting a foreign corporation to undertake broadcasting from India against the national interest
and also said that order passed by the Supreme Court by not allowing the petition was bad in Law.
Supreme Court issued a notice to the secretary to show cause as to why he should not be charged
for the contempt of Supreme court.
ISSUE
Whether his action amounts to contempt of Court?
DECISION
It is truly said that a judge who has not committed a mistake is yet to be born. Our legal system in
fact admits the shortcoming of the courts and provides for both internal and external checks to
correct the mistakes. Law thus provides procedure to correct judicial mistakes. Abuses, insulting
and disobedience are no methods to correct the mistakes of the courts. In the discharge of their
functions the courts have to be allowed to function freely and fearlessly but for which impartial
adjudication will be an impossibility. Ours is a Constitutional government based on the rule of law
so no pressure should be made on the judiciary in deciding their judgement.
The Constitution gives the task of administering and interpreting the law to the judiciary whose
view on the subject is made legally final and binding on all till it is changed by a higher court or
by a permissible legislative measure. Everyone working under the Constitution have to accept and
submit to this duty of respecting the constitutional authority of the courts. The court's decision has
to be respected not necessarily by the authority of its reason but always by reason of its authority.
Any act which is done to shake the balance of power between the three organs made by the
constitution is an attempt to undermine the rule of law and an invitation to anarchy.
OBSERVATION
It is observed that in the discharge of their functions the courts have to be allowed to function
freely and fearlessly. Law thus provides procedure to correct judicial mistakes, Abuses and
insulting are no methods to correct the mistakes of the courts.

14
1995 3 SCC 619

12
 7. RAJENDRA SAIL V. MP HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATION15
FACTS
For the murder of Shankar Guha Niyogi, accused were found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment
for life except one who was awarded death sentence. On appeal, the High Court reversed the trial
court judgment and acquitted the accused. A news report was published in newspaper 'Hitavada'
on 4th July, 1998 under the caption 'Sail terms High Court decision in Niyogi murder case as
rubbish'. Report was based on the speech delivered by appellant Rajendra Sail in a rally organized
to commemorate the death of Shankar Guha Niyogi and interview given by him soon after the
speech to appellant Ravi Pandey, the correspondent of the newspaper.
ISSUE
Whether the criticism made was bona fide and public Interest?
Whether it can be covered under section 5 of Contempt of Court Act?
DECISION
The Supreme Court was asked to decide the limits to which the press will be allowed freedom
regarding publications involving the judges and the judiciary. The Supreme Court after referring
many cases of its own relating to the topic decided that the offending words and publication
amounted to clear contempt of court. The Court re-affirmed the rights of the media to resort to
reasonable criticism of a judicial act or the judgment of the court for public good but it also said
that the media should refrain from casting insulting statement and improper motives or personal
bias to a judge. The press cannot scandalize the court or the judiciary as a whole or make personal
allegations of lack of capability or honesty against the Judge, as it should be remembered that from
the very nature of their office the judges cannot reply. The Court also held that while criticism is
welcome, it must be fair and reasonable criticism which does not scandalize or substantially
interfere with the administration of the justice.
OBSERVATION
It is observed that rights of the media to resort to reasonable criticism of a judicial act or the
judgment of the court for public good but it should refrain from casting insulting statement and
improper motives or personal bias to a judge.

15
AIR 2005 SC 2473

13
 8. IN RE AJAY KUMAR PANDEY16
FACTS
A practicing advocate filed a criminal complaint against another advocate and a lady addl. District
Judge under sec 499 and 500 of IPC. It was dismissed by both the district court and High court.
He filed SLP where he stated about the relationship with Addl. District Judge and when SLP was
listed before the SC it was noticed that language used was objectionable and abusive. SC asked
him to remove those statement but instead of doing that he filed another petition saying that he
was not obliged to remove any statement.
ISSUE
Whether he can claim defence under sec 5 of Contempt of Court Act?
DECISION
Fair comments made without any malice and without attempting to destroy the administration of
justice and made in good faith in proper language, do not attract any punishment for contempt of
court. However, when from the criticism a deliberate, motivated and calculated attempt is visible
to bring down the image of judiciary in the estimation of the public or to impair the administration
of justice or tend to bring the administration of justice into disrespect, the courts must bitter
themselves to uphold their dignity and the respect for law.
OBSERVATION
It is observed that fair comments made without any malice and without attempting to destroy the
administration of justice and made in good faith in proper language, do not attract any punishment
for contempt of court.

9. PERSPECTIVE PUBLICATIONS LTD. V STATE OF MAHARASHRA17

FACTS
Thackersey filed a suit in which he was claiming 3 lac rupees as compensation. An article was
published in a weekly journal “Mainstream” where he was saying that a firm in which justice
Tarkunde’s father and two brothers were partners, had received financial assistance from the Bank

16
JT 1998 (6) SC 571
17
AIR 1971 SC 221

14
of India where Thackersey was a director. The article raised a question of authority of Justice
Tarkunde hearing a libel suit.
DECISION
It was held that when an article is read as a whole it creates no doubt that it is questioning the
authority and honesty of the Judge in deciding the defamation suit. It is open to anyone to give fair
and legitimate criticism or make any fair comment on the conduct of the Judge of the court. But
the article has not only crossed the boundary of fair criticism but also has a clear intention to effect
the dignity of the court.
OBSERVATION
It is observed that article has not only crossed the boundary of fair criticism but also has a clear
intention to effect the dignity of the court.

CONCLUSION
It is true that no judge is born perfect. Our system and judiciary accept that there are many cases
where judges have made mistakes in giving judgement, that does not mean that anyone can make
defamatory and insulting statement against the Court. Court should be allowed to work freely and
no pressure should be made on them in giving its decision. Supreme Court also laid emphasis on
limiting the power of media on giving its statement on court decision. It said that it is necessary to
give opinion which are necessary for public benefit, but it should not make insulting statement and
personal bias against the judge.

15
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
1. Borries and Low's, Law of Contempt, 2nd edition, Lexis Nexis Butterworth London, 1983.

2. Samar Aditya Pal, The Law of Contempt,5th Edition, Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa
Nagpur, 2013.

Websites
3. www.heinonline.com

4. www.indiakanoon.org

5. www.manuputra.com

6. www.scconline.com

Reports
7. Constitutional Assembly Debates, 1948.

8. Report of the Committee on Contempt of Court, 1963. (Sanyal Committee)

Articles/Journals
9. A.H. Pekelis, Legal Techniques and Political Ideologies: A Comparative Study, Mich.L. Rev.,
Vol. 41, 1943.

10. A.N.Grover, Press and Parliament, Journal of Constitutional Parliamentary Studies, vol. 18,
1984.

11. D.G.T. Williams, Contempt of Court: Possible Refomis, Cambridge Law journal, Vol.34,
1975.

12. F.A. Mann, Contempt of Court in the House of Lords and European Court of Human Rights,
Law Quarterly Review, Vol. 95, 1979.

16