Constituition Validity Of Contempt Of Court And Balancing Freedom Of Speech And Judicial Independence
Author: LawSphereX
Category: General Law
Published:
Updated:
CONSTITUITION VALIDITY OF CONTEMPT OF COURT
AND BALANCING FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE Jayansh Sharma, Manipal University Jaipur Naman Goyal, Manipal University Jaipur MEANING OF CONTEMPT OF COURT One of the essential features of the court of law is to adjudicate the matter pending or brought before the court, in the process of adjudication the courts determine the rights and liabilities of the parties through its decision, so when one of the parties or any person having interest in such decision does not fulfill his obligation rooted in such decision given by the competent court, or any act or any conduct on the behalf of any person that tends to lower the reputation of the authority or any act itself or causes obstruction in the process of implications of such decision or any act which obstructs or becomes hurdle in the administration and meeting the end of justice is known as “contempt of the court”.
ORIGIN IN INDIA The basis of the concept of the contempt of the court has been the English law, in English law superior court has been bestowed with the power of giving punishments for any obstruction in the administration of justice, the first step that was taken with the object of securing the integrity and dignity of the decision of the court was the effective application of the Contempt of the court act,1926 and after India got the independence the aforesaid act was reintroduced again as the, Contempt of court Act, 1952, but it did not include as to what constitutes the act of contempt of the court, meaning there was no ambit as to which act fall in the area of contempt of court, with the object of rectifying such trench the final legislation with the object of securing end of justice the current legislation Contempt of court Act, 1971 was introduced.
For this purpose a committee was constituted and chairman of the committee was H. N. Sanyal and the day on which it was constituted was 29th of july, 1961, H. N. Sanyal was additional solicitor general at that point of time, In the period of 2 years a drafted bill along with its report was submitted by the committee1.
TYPES OF CONTEMPT The contempt of the court can be classified under two categories, Civil contempt- As per the provision 2[b] of the contempt of court act, 1971 the term civil contempt denotes willful disregard for any ruling, order, writ, or other judicial process as well as willful violation of a court-issued obligation; Criminal contempt- As per provision 2[c] of the contempt of court act, 1971 the term criminal contempt denotes the publication of any matter or the performance of any act whatsoever which— (i) causes or threatens to cause scandal, diminishes or threatens to diminish the authority of any court; (ii) Prejudices, obstructs or threatens to obstruct the proper course of any judicial proceeding; or (iii) interferes, tends to interfere, or obstructs the administration of justice in any other way; CONSTITUTION VALIDITY OF CONTEMPT OF COURT The seventh schedule of the Indian constitution contains three types of list which are as following;-
1. The list 1 which is union list that empowers the parliament to make laws regarding the
subject matter that is under the ambit of this list.
2. The list 2 which is the state list empowers the state government to make laws regarding
the subject matter that is under the ambit of such list.
3. The list 3 which is the concurrent list empowers both the state and parliament to make
1 Objective
And Constitutional Validity Of Contempt Of Court, Legal Vidhiya (June 15, 2023), https://legalvidhiya. com/objective-and-constitutional-validity-of-contempt-of-court/ laws regarding the subject matter that is under the ambit of the list. The subject matter of Contempt of the court is mentioned under both the Union list(Entry 77), and the Concurrent list (Entry 14), means under the Article 246(1) of the Indian constitution the parliament has been bestowed with the power of making laws regarding the subject matter of the contempt of court and on the contrary the article 246(2) empower both the state and the parliament to make laws regarding the same subject matter.
However the upper hand is given to the parliament, means under Article 254(1), in case of conflict between the state and parliament/union, the law made by the state shall be void as to the extent of the repugnancy or in simple words inconsistent. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS REGARDING CONTEMPT OF COURT
1. Under the article 219 of the Indian constitution the Supreme court of India has the
authority to grant punishment regarding the contempt of any of its decision.
2. Furthermore article 142(2), enables the Supreme court to investigate the matter of the
contempt of the court.
3. Article 144 enables the Supreme Court to take assist of any judicial and civil authorities.
4. Article 215 of the Indian constitution empowers the High court to impose punishment
for the contempt of any of its decision. As per the Rule 3 of the regulation of the proceeding for the contempt of the supreme court, the proceedings in this case can be initiated in following manner;
1. On its own cognizance (Suo motu)
2. A petition that is made and submitted on the behalf of attorney general or solicitor
general of India.
3. In case of any Criminal contempt petition by any person with the consent of attorney
general and solicitor general of India in writing. The balance between contempt of court and freedom of speech is very complex and there is a very thin line separating both the issues, and it often varies depending on the jurisdiction and facts of every case, freedom of speech on the other hand is one of the Fundamental right that has been provided under article 19(1) of the Indian constitution that allows individual to express their opinion and ideas without any censorship or restraint from the government, however the right given under article 19(1) is not absolute and it can be curtailed under article 19(2), that provides reasonable restriction on such speech and expression, that stops the consolidation of power and does not give the absolute power to one person.
Furthermore it can be said the Contempt of court does not violate fundamental right under article 21 of the Indian constitution where it is mentioned that “No person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except by the procedure established by law”, so because the sanction imposed in this behalf derives their power from the statue so it can be said that the concept of Contempt of court is not inconsistent with any of fundamental rights given under Indian constitution. The Indian constitution protects the independence of the judiciary in order to safeguard the impartiality, fairness, and adherence to the rule of law, the concept of contempt of court upholds the independence the of the judiciary and protects the dignity and integrity of the decision of the court, it helps to maintain confidence of the public in the judicial system.
It is the duty of the court maintain a balance between freedom of speech and ensuring and the independence of the judiciary, in the view of this idea the public has the right criticize the judicial decision but the given right has to be exercised in the reasonable manner. LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS In the landmark Judgement of Aruna roy v. Union of India2, it was held by the supreme court that under the preview of contempt of court, constructive criticism of the Indian judiciary is allowed as it comes under the free speech and expression under article 19(1) of the Indian constitution, but it comes with a catch or a condition that such criticism has to be done without any malice means it has to be bona fide and it should be in the interest of the public. In another landmark judgement of Brahma Praksh Sharma v. State of U. P3, it was held by
2 AIR 2002 SC 3176
3 1954 SCR 1169
the court that making or passing of any statement that questions or undermines the dignity and authority of the court does fall under the ambit of contempt of the court. In the landmark judgement of Baradakanta Mishra v. The registrar of Orissa High court4, it was held by the supreme court that the power given to the court for punishment of contempt is not absolute on the contrary it is the duty of the court to ensure that it is exercised judiciously and with caution also and it should be exercised only when there is case of real and substantial interference with the administration of justice, otherwise it will result into the violation of Free speech and expression under article 19 and right to life and dignity under article 21 of the Indian constitution.
CONCLUSION
The concept of the contempt of the court is very subjective, means it will differ from person to person, a person would say that this comment comes under fair and reasonable criticism but the same statement will have the liability of contempt in the eyes of any other person, so it can be said that it is open to various interpretation and if there is no set of guidelines as to what constitutes contempt, it may lead to abuse of the power of the court. The punishment that is imposed for the contempt includes both fine and imprisonment so in some cases the punishment may be disproportionate to the actual offence, that may lead to excessive punishment and it may result into the violation of basic human rights.
The Concept of contempt of court works as deterrent effect and it may discourage individuals to report on legal proceedings, and the trial for adjudication of contempt includes the judges, that can disrupt the proceeding and it will have a direct effect on the fairness of the trial. The courts are the guardian of the rights of the individuals and regarded as temple of justice, any individual who seeks justice will approach the court with the idea of such issue will be heard and justice would be served, that is the duty of the court to be fair on the contrary it is the primary duty of every individual draw line between free speech and expression and reasonable criticism of the judiciary. In conclusion it can be said that no right is absolute, there should be balance between fair and reasonable comment and the dignity and integrity of the court.
4 1974 SCC (1) 374