INSIGHT TO THE TOPIC
Contempt of court is again in the headlines in India, as a notion that tries to shield judicial institutions from unjustified insults and criticism, as well as a legal tool to penalise those who undermine its authority. This comes after the Supreme Court of India initiated contempt proceedings on its own initiative.
In India, there were laws against contempt prior to independence. Aside from the early High Courts, other princely kingdoms' courts had similar statutes. Contempt of court was established one of the constraints on freedom of speech and expression when the Constitution was created. Separately, Article 129 of the Constitution gave the Supreme Court the authority to punish itself for contempt. The High Courts were given an equivalent power under Article 215 of the Constitution. The theory is backed up by the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971.
Making claims against the judiciary or individual judges, assigning motivations to decisions and judicial functioning, and any scurrilous criticism on judges' conduct are usually regarded scandalous. This rule is justified by the fact that courts must be safeguarded from malicious attacks that undermine their authority, tarnish their public image, and cause the public to lose trust in their impartiality.
Fair and accurate reporting of judicial proceedings and fair criticism on the merits of order given by court on any case are not the grounds for initiation of contempt proceedings.
PUNISHMENT FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT
The Supreme Court and High Courts of India have the authority to hold someone in contempt of court and punish them appropriately.
Contempt of court is punishable under section 12 of Contempt of Courts act, which specifies that a person can be punished for contempt of court by simple imprisonment for a term of up to six months, a fine of up to two thousand rupees, or both. In terms of penalty, this clause applies to both categories of contempt because there is no distinction between civil and criminal contempt in terms of penal rules.
However, there is a little exemption clause in this punitive law that states that if a person makes an apology to the court that is accepted by the court, the person will be dismissed or the sentence imposed on him will be pardoned.
Also, for a proper understanding and execution of the requirements, section 12 must be read in conjunction with section 13. According to Section 13 of the Act, a person shall not be held accountable for contempt of court unless it has been adequately proven that the contempt was of such character or presented such a threat that it may degrade the dignity of the court or interfere with duly performed duties.
The limitation term for contempt proceedings is one year from the day the contempt is claimed to have been committed, according to Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971.