Criminal contempt, any act done or writing published which is calculated to bring a Court or a Judge into contempt, or to lower his authority, or to interfere with the due course of justice or the lawful process of the Court, is a contempt of Court. Any episode in the administration of justice may, however, be publicly or privately criticised, provided that the criticism is fair and temperate and made in good faith. The absence of any intention to refer to a Court is a material point in favour of a person alleged to be in contempt, Thakur Jugal Kishore Singh v. Sitamarhi Central Co.-op. Bank Ltd., AIR 1967 SC 1494 (1497): (1967) 3 SCC 163. [Contempt of Courts Act, 1952, s. 3]
Clause (c) of S. 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971) merely codifies the definition of 'criminal contempt' which had previously been crystallised by judicial decisions. It defines 'criminal contempt' to mean publication of any matter, or the doing of any other act which
(i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of any court; or
(ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceedings;
(iii) interferes or tends to interfere, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner, S. Abdul Karim v. M.K. Prakash, (1976) 1 SCC 975: AIR 1976SC 859: (1976) 3 SCR 276.
criminal contempt means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by sings, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which'
(i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or
(ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere, with, the due course of any judicial proceedings;
(iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner; It is noteworthy, that in the categorisation of contempt in the three sub-clauses (i) to (iii), only category (ii) refers to 'judicial proceeding. Scandalising of court in its administrative capacity will also be covered by sub-clause (i) and (iii). The phrase 'administration of justice' in sub-clause (iii) is far wider in scope then; course of any judicial proceedings. The last words 'in any other manner' of sub-clause (ii) further extend its ambit and give it a residuary character. Although sub-clauses (i) to (iii) describe three distinct species of 'Criminal contempt', they are not always mutually exclusive. Interference or tendency to interfere with any judicial proceeding or administration of justice is a common element of sub-clauses (ii) and (iii). This element is not required to be established for a criminal contempt of the kind falling under sub-clause (i), Rachapudi Subba Rao v. Advocate General, Andhra Pradesh, (1981) 2 SCC 577: AIR 1982 SC 755: (1981) 2 SCR 320.
It means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which'(i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or
(ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or
(iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner. [Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971), s. 2 (c)]
View Judgments Citing this Phrase View Acts Citing this Phrase