The Law Commission of India has recommended that no change be made to the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971..The Commission was examining whether or not the definition of contempt of court under Section 2 of the Act should be limited to ‘wilful disobedience of directions/judgment of the Court’..In its report, the Law Commission arrived at the conclusion that there was no need to change the existing law, as the statute is merely procedural in nature and not substantive..Further, the Commission concluded that the source of the power to punish for contempt does not originate from the statute, but is an inherent power of the superior courts available to them under Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution. The Commission was of the view that this power of the superior courts, which is vested in them by the Constitution, cannot be fettered by any legislation..The Commission also pointed out that since the sanctity of Articles 129 and 215 has been upheld by the Supreme Court on several occasions, any amendment to the Act 1971 would be undesirable..Moreover, the Commission held that limiting the ambit of contempt will have no effect on the powers available with the superior courts, but will primarily expose the subordinate courts to increased instances of unaddressed contempt of court. This, because the scope of Section 10 of the Act, which empowers the High Court to punish for contempt of subordinate court, is narrow..It was also highlighted that the Act contains adequate safeguards to restrict the abuse of power available with the superior court. Since the Act has been subjected to judicial scrutiny for about five decades, an amendment to the Act is not needed because of the continuing need to discourage “contemptuous elements”..“In the interest of consistency and coherency, it is suggested to continue with the existing definition, which has stood the test of judicial scrutiny.”.The report further states that if the scope of contempt is narrowed, it might lead to a situation where the “respect” for and “fear” of the courts is lessened. This, the report states, may lead to an undesired increase in the instances of “deliberate denial and blasphemy of the courts”..The Commission therefore concluded,.“The amendment to section 2(c) would not be a meaningful exercise and would not be in the larger public interest…Further, viewed from the angle of the frequent indulgence of unscrupulous litigants and lawyers alike with the administration of justice, it would not be in the interest of litigants and the public at large to minimize the effect of the exercise of powers of contempt as and when the need arises. Therefore, the Commission does not consider it necessary to make any amendment therein for the present.”.The report also reveals statistics on the number of contempt cases pending in the higher judiciary. As of June 2017, high courts have a pendency of 568 criminal contempt cases and 96,310 civil contempt cases. The Orissa High Court leads in the former category with 104 pending matters, while the Allahabad High Court has a whopping 25,370 pending civil contempt cases. 683 civil and 15 criminal contempt cases are pending in the Supreme Court..Read the report:
The Law Commission of India has recommended that no change be made to the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971..The Commission was examining whether or not the definition of contempt of court under Section 2 of the Act should be limited to ‘wilful disobedience of directions/judgment of the Court’..In its report, the Law Commission arrived at the conclusion that there was no need to change the existing law, as the statute is merely procedural in nature and not substantive..Further, the Commission concluded that the source of the power to punish for contempt does not originate from the statute, but is an inherent power of the superior courts available to them under Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution. The Commission was of the view that this power of the superior courts, which is vested in them by the Constitution, cannot be fettered by any legislation..The Commission also pointed out that since the sanctity of Articles 129 and 215 has been upheld by the Supreme Court on several occasions, any amendment to the Act 1971 would be undesirable..Moreover, the Commission held that limiting the ambit of contempt will have no effect on the powers available with the superior courts, but will primarily expose the subordinate courts to increased instances of unaddressed contempt of court. This, because the scope of Section 10 of the Act, which empowers the High Court to punish for contempt of subordinate court, is narrow..It was also highlighted that the Act contains adequate safeguards to restrict the abuse of power available with the superior court. Since the Act has been subjected to judicial scrutiny for about five decades, an amendment to the Act is not needed because of the continuing need to discourage “contemptuous elements”..“In the interest of consistency and coherency, it is suggested to continue with the existing definition, which has stood the test of judicial scrutiny.”.The report further states that if the scope of contempt is narrowed, it might lead to a situation where the “respect” for and “fear” of the courts is lessened. This, the report states, may lead to an undesired increase in the instances of “deliberate denial and blasphemy of the courts”..The Commission therefore concluded,.“The amendment to section 2(c) would not be a meaningful exercise and would not be in the larger public interest…Further, viewed from the angle of the frequent indulgence of unscrupulous litigants and lawyers alike with the administration of justice, it would not be in the interest of litigants and the public at large to minimize the effect of the exercise of powers of contempt as and when the need arises. Therefore, the Commission does not consider it necessary to make any amendment therein for the present.”.The report also reveals statistics on the number of contempt cases pending in the higher judiciary. As of June 2017, high courts have a pendency of 568 criminal contempt cases and 96,310 civil contempt cases. The Orissa High Court leads in the former category with 104 pending matters, while the Allahabad High Court has a whopping 25,370 pending civil contempt cases. 683 civil and 15 criminal contempt cases are pending in the Supreme Court..Read the report:
