UPSC Prelims 2022 Q11: Contempt of Court in India — Explained
Consider the following statements:
1. Pursuant to the report of H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed.
2. The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves.
3. The Constitution of India defines Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt.
4. In India, the Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of Court.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- 1 and 2 only
- 1, 2 and 4
- 3 and 4 only
- 3 only
Answer: (b) 1, 2 and 4
Statement-wise explanation
- 1: correct — In 1961 the government set up a committee under H.N. Sanyal, then Additional Solicitor General, to review the law on contempt. It reported in 1963. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed on the basis of its recommendations and a later Joint Select Committee of Parliament. It replaced the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952.
- 2: correct — Article 129 makes the Supreme Court a court of record with 'all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself'. Article 215 says the same for every High Court. The power comes from the Constitution itself. The 1971 Act only regulates how the power is used.
- 3: incorrect — The Constitution does not define civil contempt or criminal contempt. It only uses the words 'contempt of court' in Articles 19(2), 129, 142(2) and 215, and in the Seventh Schedule. The definitions are in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: Section 2(b) defines civil contempt and Section 2(c) defines criminal contempt.
- 4: correct — Entry 77 of the Union List covers the Supreme Court's jurisdiction and powers, 'including contempt of such Court'. Entry 14 of the Concurrent List covers 'contempt of court, but not including contempt of the Supreme Court'. So Parliament can make laws on contempt, and it did so in the 1971 Act. States can also legislate under the Concurrent List entry, but that does not make the statement wrong.
How to eliminate
Start with Statement 3. The Constitution rarely defines legal offences in detail. Detailed definitions such as 'civil' and 'criminal' contempt belong in a statute. The well-known definitions are in Section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Once Statement 3 is out, the options containing 3 drop out. You are left choosing between '1 and 2 only' and '1, 2 and 4'. Statement 4 follows from basic knowledge: Parliament passed the 1971 Act, so it must have power to legislate on contempt. That power comes from Entry 77 of List I and Entry 14 of List III. You do not need to know anything about the Sanyal Committee to reach the answer. Facts to remember: Articles 129 and 215 give the power, the 1971 Act gives the definitions, and the Seventh Schedule gives Parliament the power to legislate.
Know more
Contempt of court: three layers of law
| Layer | Provision | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| Constitution | Art. 129 (SC), Art. 215 (HCs) | Make these courts 'courts of record' with power to punish contempt of themselves |
| Constitution | Art. 19(2) | Allows reasonable restrictions on free speech in relation to contempt of court |
| Constitution | Art. 142(2) | SC's power to punish contempt, subject to any law made by Parliament |
| Seventh Schedule | List I Entry 77; List III Entry 14 | Give legislative power over contempt (the SC under the Union List; other courts under the Concurrent List) |
| Statute | Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 | Defines the kinds of contempt, the punishment and the procedure |
Key features of the 1971 Act
- Civil contempt (Sec. 2(b)): wilful disobedience of a court's judgment, order or writ, or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
- Criminal contempt (Sec. 2(c)): publishing anything or doing any act that scandalises or lowers the authority of a court, prejudices judicial proceedings, or obstructs the administration of justice.
- Punishment (Sec. 12): simple imprisonment up to six months, a fine up to ₹2,000, or both. An apology made in good faith may be accepted.
- Truth as a defence (Sec. 13): added in 2006. Applies if the court finds the statement was in the public interest and made in good faith.
- Consent (Sec. 15): a private person needs the Attorney General's or Solicitor General's consent to move criminal contempt in the Supreme Court. In a High Court, the consent comes from the Advocate General.
- Limitation (Sec. 20): no proceedings can start more than one year after the contempt.
The Supreme Court has held that a law cannot take away the contempt power given by Articles 129 and 215. A law can only regulate the procedure.
In the news
Contempt of court was much in the news before the 2022 exam. In August 2020 the Supreme Court held advocate Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for his tweets and fined him ₹1. In 2020–21, requests for the Attorney General's consent to prosecute comedians and others for criminal contempt also drew attention. The Act also turned 50 in December 2021.
NCERT Concepts to Revise
- Contempt of court: Statement 3 asks where the two kinds of contempt, civil and criminal, are defined.
- Criminal contempt: The full meaning of criminal contempt helps you judge which document sets out such a detailed definition.
- Court of record: Statement 2 depends on what the Constitution gives a 'court of record'.
- Union, State and Concurrent Lists: Statement 4 depends on which lists of the Seventh Schedule include contempt of court.
- Union List: Shows what the Union List entry on the Supreme Court means for Parliament's power in Statement 4.
- Restrictions on freedom of speech: Contempt of court is one of the grounds in Article 19(2), showing where the Constitution itself mentions contempt.