UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Don’t level baseless graft claims against judiciary: SC

Q1. With reference to the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, consider the following acts: 1. Wilful disobedience of a judgment, decree or order of a court 2. Publication of matter that scandalises or lowers the authority of a court 3. Wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court 4. Doing an act that prejudices or interferes with the due course of a judicial proceeding Which of the above is/are correctly identified as amounting to CRIMINAL contempt under the Act?

  1. Wilful disobedience of a judgment, decree or order of a court
  2. Publication of matter that scandalises or lowers the authority of a court
  3. Wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court
  4. Doing an act that prejudices or interferes with the due course of a judicial proceeding
  • A. 1 and 3 only
  • B. 2 and 4 only
  • C. 1, 2 and 4
  • D. 3 only

Q2. Under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the maximum amount of fine that a court may impose as punishment for contempt is:

  • A. Two thousand rupees
  • B. Five thousand rupees
  • C. One thousand rupees
  • D. Ten thousand rupees

Q3. In July 2026 a Supreme Court Bench cautioned that unsubstantiated corruption allegations against judicial officers, amplified on social media, can irreparably tarnish a judge's career. This Bench comprised which of the following judges?

  • A. Justices Sanjiv Khanna and B.R. Gavai
  • B. Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan
  • C. Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu
  • D. Justices Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih

Q4. In the 2026 matter concerning activist Gulshan Pahuja, the sentence under challenge before the Supreme Court — imposed for criminal contempt over allegedly derogatory videos targeting judicial officers — was imprisonment for a term of:

  • A. Six months
  • B. Three months
  • C. One year
  • D. Two years

Q5. Under Section 18 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, every case of criminal contempt under Section 15 must be heard and determined by a Bench of not less than how many judges?

  • A. One judge
  • B. Two judges
  • C. Three judges
  • D. Five judges

Q6. Consider the following statements regarding the two-judge Bench requirement under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: 1. Every case of criminal contempt under Section 15 is to be heard and determined by a Bench of not less than two judges. 2. This minimum two-judge Bench requirement applies to criminal contempt of both the Supreme Court and the High Courts. 3. The same minimum two-judge Bench requirement also governs proceedings for civil contempt arising from wilful disobedience of a decree. 4. Where criminal contempt is committed in respect of a subordinate court, the High Court may take cognizance in the manner it does for contempt of itself. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. Every case of criminal contempt under Section 15 is to be heard and determined by a Bench of not less than two judges.
  2. This minimum two-judge Bench requirement applies to criminal contempt of both the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
  3. The same minimum two-judge Bench requirement also governs proceedings for civil contempt arising from wilful disobedience of a decree.
  4. Where criminal contempt is committed in respect of a subordinate court, the High Court may take cognizance in the manner it does for contempt of itself.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 4 only
  • C. 3 only
  • D. 1, 3 and 4

Q7. Under the 'in-house procedure' for the higher judiciary, complaints against the conduct of judges of the Supreme Court and Chief Justices of High Courts are competent to be received by which of the following?

  • A. The Union Minister of Law and Justice
  • B. The Lokpal
  • C. The Chief Justice of India
  • D. The President of India

Q8. When a motion for the removal of a judge is admitted, the committee constituted to investigate the ground of 'proved misbehaviour or incapacity' consists of how many members?

  • A. Two members
  • B. Five members
  • C. Three members
  • D. Seven members

Q9. Consider the following statements about the constitutional basis of contempt jurisdiction in India: 1. Article 129 declares the Supreme Court to be a court of record with power to punish for contempt of itself. 2. Article 215 declares every High Court to be a court of record with power to punish for contempt of itself. 3. These contempt powers are derived solely from the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and not from the Constitution. 4. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 principally lays down the procedure and limits for exercising contempt jurisdiction. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Article 129 declares the Supreme Court to be a court of record with power to punish for contempt of itself.
  2. Article 215 declares every High Court to be a court of record with power to punish for contempt of itself.
  3. These contempt powers are derived solely from the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and not from the Constitution.
  4. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 principally lays down the procedure and limits for exercising contempt jurisdiction.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 1, 2 and 4
  • C. 2, 3 and 4
  • D. 1, 2, 3 and 4

Q10. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which lays down the procedure for exercising contempt jurisdiction, is administered by which of the following?

  • A. Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice
  • B. Ministry of Home Affairs
  • C. Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice
  • D. Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice

Q11. To take cognizance of criminal contempt of the Supreme Court on a motion, the written consent of which of the following authorities is required under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971?

  • A. The Chief Justice of India
  • B. The Union Law Minister
  • C. The Advocate General of the State
  • D. The Attorney General for India

Q12. With reference to the offence of 'scandalising the court' and free-speech safeguards in India, which one of the following statements is correct?

  • A. Fair criticism of a judicial act, made in good faith, does not amount to contempt of court.
  • B. All published criticism of a judge necessarily constitutes criminal contempt.
  • C. Truth can under no circumstances be pleaded as a defence in any contempt proceeding.
  • D. The offence of 'scandalising the court' has been statutorily abolished in India.