Consider the following statements:
1. Pursuant to the report of the H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed.
2. The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and High Court 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 power to make laws on Contempt of Court.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
a. 1 and 2 only
b. 1, 2 and 4
c. 3 and 4 only
d. 3 only
Answer: b
Explanation:
In India, the law of contempt has a direct relation with the common law jurisdiction of England. The “courts of record” in England exercised contempt powers to convict persons who scandalised the court or the judges.
The courts of record have been indicative of a superior status rather than a court that is regulated through procedure.
A court that is such a high and supereminent authority that its truth is not to be called into question.
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council recognised that the Indian High Courts should have the same inherent power to punish for contempt, especially the three Charter High Courts—Calcutta, Bombay and Madras.
The other High Courts of British India, by virtue of being courts of record, started exercising this power.
British India passed the Contempt of Courts Act 1926, which was replaced by the Contempt of Courts Act 1952.
There were various efforts to improve this 1952 law. Finally, the H.N. Sanyal Committee was set up to examine the law relating to contempt of courts in the light of the position obtaining in India and various other countries.
The committee gave its report in 1963. It recorded the principle underlying the law of contempt as expounded in the Almon case: “The power of committing contempt was the emanation of royal authority, for any contempt of court would be contempt of the sovereign.” Pursuant to this report, the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 was passed.
Hence, Statement 1 is correct.
Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution empowered the Supreme Court and the High Courts, respectively, “to punish for contempt of itself”.
Article-129: Supreme Court to be a court of record.—The Supreme Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court, including the power to punish for contempt of itself.
Article 215: High Courts to be courts of record.—Every High Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court, including the power to punish for contempt of itself.
Hence, Statement 2 is correct.
It is the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971, which defines “civil contempt” and “criminal contempt ” in addition to the procedure to be followed. The Constitution of India does not define “civil contempt” and “criminal contempt.”
Civil contempt is wilful disobedience of the court orders whereas criminal contempt is to “scandalise or lower the authority of court”, “prejudicing or interfering with the administration of judicial proceedings and or administration of justice”.
Hence, Statement 3 is incorrect.
The power to make law relating to contempt was set out in Entry 77 of List I (Union List) and Entry 14, List III (concurrent list) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. Legislatures ( union and state) are vested with the power to make laws on contempt.
Hence, Statement 4 is correct.
Read: Previous Year UPSC Polity Questions (PYQs) With Explanation 2022