Contempt of Court Act 1971

Contempt of court is defined as behaviour that disrespects or undermines a court’s authority or dignity. It can occur directly in the presence of the court or indirectly outside the court’s presence. In a nutshell, it is illegal to show disrespect for the court’s integrity or jurisdiction. A judge may impose punishment such as a penalty or jail time if someone is found guilty of contempt of court. Also, contempt of court is defined as any act or publication intended to throw a court or judge into disrepute, degrade his authority, or interfere with the due course of justice or the court’s legal procedure.

The Importance of Contempt of Court Act of 1971

Violation of a court of law or its ruling is referred to as contempt of the law. The recognition of contempt of court and the ability to punish contempt is critical for a country like India, founded on the concept of the rule of law.

Punishment exists as a corrective measure. It also is curative in the sense that the Supreme Court bar association vs Union of India (1995) ensures justice for a complainant.

Contempt of court can take two forms, criminal and civil. The failure to obey a court order is sometimes referred to as civil contempt, and judges use civil contempt sanctions to compel such a person to obey a court order that they have disobeyed. 

Criminal contempt of court charges, on the other hand, are punitive, meaning they are intended to prevent future acts of contempt by penalising the offender regardless of the outcome of the underlying action.

What Is the Contempt of Court Act 1971?

• The Supreme Court and the High Court, respectively, are empowered by Articles 129 and 215 of the Indian Constitution to punish anyone for their acts of contempt.

• The power of the High Court to penalise contempt of its subordinate courts is defined in Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971.

• Article 19(1) does not apply to the power to penalise for contempt of court under Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution (a).

• Contempt of court is punishable by either a fine or a period of simple jail up to six months.

The Amendment of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 in 2006

The Act was revised in 2006 to include the defence of truth under Section 13 of the original 1971 legislation. Implying that under the amendment of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 in 2006, the court should allow for justification by truth as a rational defence if it is satisfied that it is in the public interest.

It exists for the following reasons:

• It is necessary to punish willful disobedience to court orders (civil contempt).

• To keep judges secure from threats.

• Protect the institution from unjustified attacks.

• Prevent a sudden deterioration in the judiciary’s public image.

The Reformation Required in the Contempt of Court Act of 1971 

• Judicial criticism abounds on social media. It is not desirable to misuse the judiciary’s time enforcing its power to penalise for its disobedience.

• In 2013, England repealed the crime of “scandalising the court,” from which the concept was adopted.

• The media is barred from investigating the operation of the judiciary due to contempt of court.

• In India, the definition of criminal contempt is highly broad and can be easily invoked.

• The Court’s suo motu powers to commence such cases merely add to the complications.

• The present democratic system, which recognises freedom of speech and expression as a basic right, is utterly at odds with criminal contempt.

The Objective of the Contempt of Court Act of 1971

One of the main goals of the law of contempt is to defend the justice system and the public’s interests. It provides a framework for preventing interference and maintaining the law’s authority. The goal of contempt proceedings is to safeguard the public from disproportionate attacks on the court’s authority and the administration of justice, not to protect judges personally from criticism.

Conclusion

Civil contempt is crucial to stop people from disobeying orders of the court intentionally. If they are allowed to pay no heed to judicial orders, the public would lose their trust in the fairness of India’s judiciary system.For any law to exist it is of utmost importance for the citizens to have faith in their nation’s legal system.