Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Supreme Court in the matter of Ajay Kumar Bhalla & Ors v. Prakash Kumar Dixit has held that an appeal is maintainable against the Bench even if there is no punishment order.

What was the Background of the Ajay Kumar Bhalla & Ors v. Prakash Kumar Dixit Case?

• The respondent was posted as Officer Commanding in the Central Reserve Police Force when disciplinary proceedings started against him due to alleged act of misconduct on his part.
• He was removed from his service by the Trial Court against which he appealed before the Delhi High Court.
• The Delhi High Court reversed the order of the Trial Court and reappointed the respondent in the service with other benefits.
• The order of the High Court was not complied with due to which respondent filed contempt proceedings before the Delhi High Court.
• On 8^th March 2021 the respondent was re-appointed in the services and on 17^th October 2021 he was promoted to the rank of Deputy Commandant on a notional basis with effect from the order dated 22^nd March 2023.
• The respondent superannuated on 31^st March 2023.
• The Single Bench Judge of the High Court ordered the respondent to all promotions till the rank of Inspector General from 2021 to his retirement date, 31^st March 2023.
• The Judge noted that there has been a willful disobedience of the directions passed by the division bench of Delhi High Court.
  • The court held the Inspector General of Police (Personnel) and Deputy Inspector General (Personnel) guilty of contempt of court.
  • The court granted the opportunity to issue fresh order granting promotion to the respondent to the rank of IG to bring him at par with his immediate junior as per the merit cum seniority list at the time of the appointment.
• The order was appealed by the plaintiff in a Letters Patent Appeal which was dismissed by the Division Bench.
  • The Bench stated that the appeal was not maintainable as there was no punishment orders given against the plaintiff.
  • The Bench stated that the appeal is not maintainable as it does not fulfill the requirements of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (CC).
• The plaintiff appealed the decision of the Division Bench before the Supreme Court.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The Supreme Court observed the purview of Section 19 of CC Act.
  • The Supreme Court held that the findings of the Division Bench need to be determined.
  • The Supreme Court relied upon the judgement of the Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. and Others v. Chunilal Nanda and Others (2006) where it was held that the appeal under Section 19 lies only against an order imposing punishment for contempt.
• The Supreme Court held that the respondent was entitled to promotion to the rank of Inspector General was amenable to an appeal by drawing inferences from the Midnapore People’s case.
  • It was inferred that in contempt proceedings, the aggrieved person is not without remedy.
  • Such an order is open to challenge in an intra-court appeal or by seeking special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India based on what law permits.
• The Supreme court reversed the order of the Division Bench and held that the Letter Patent Appeal to be heard.
• The Supreme Court also stated that no action would be taken against the authorities till the matter is listed again before the Delhi High Court.

What is the Contempt of Courts Act 1971?

• The CC Act was passed by Parliament in the year 1971 and came into force on 24^th December 1974.
• The main objective of the CC Act is to protect the integrity of the courts.
• This CC Act gives inherent powers to the court to punish against its own contempt.
• Contempt of court seeks to protect judicial institutions from motivated attacks and unwarranted criticism, and as a legal mechanism to punish those who lower its authority.
• When the Constitution was adopted, contempt of court was made one of the restrictions on freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution of India.
• Separately, Article 129 of the Constitution conferred on the Supreme Court the power to punish contempt of itself.
• Article 215 conferred a corresponding power on the High Courts.

Kinds of Contempt of Court

• Civil Contempt: It is the willful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
• Criminal Contempt: It is the publication of any matter or the doing of any other act which scandalizes or lowers the authority of any court or interferes with the due course of any judicial proceeding or obstructs the administration of justice in any other manner.

Punishment under Contempt of Courts Act

• Section 12 of the CC Act states that punishment for the guilty with imprisonment that may extend to six months or fine of Rs 2,000 or both.
• It was amended in 2006 to include “truth and good faith” as a defense.
• It was added that the court may impose punishments only if the act of the other person substantially interferes or tends to interfere with the due course of justice.

Defenses under Contempt of Courts Act

• Civil Contempt
  • The following defenses can be covered under Section 8 of the CC Act.
    • No knowledge of order.
    • Disobedience or breach was not willful.
    • Order disobeyed is vague or ambiguous.
    • Order involves more than reasonable interpretation.
    • Compliance with the order is impossible.
    • The order has been passed without jurisdiction.
• Criminal Contempt
  • Innocent publication and distribution of matte (Section 3 of the CC Act)
  • Fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings (Section 4 of the CC Act)
  • Fair criticism of judicial act (Section 5 of the CC Act)
  • Bonafide complain against the presiding officer of a subordinate court. (Section 6 of the CC Act)
  • No substantial interference with due course of justice (Section 13 of the CC Act)
  • Justification by truth (Section 13 of the CC Act).
  • The statement complained of is open to different interpretations.

Appeal under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

• The provisions related to appeal are given under Section 19 of the CC Act as
  • Clause (1) states that an appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt—
    • where the order or decision is that of a single judge, to a Bench of not less than two judges of the Court.
    • where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court: Provided that where the order or decision is that of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.
  • Clause (2) states that pending any appeal, the appellate Court may order that—
    • The execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended.
    • If the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail.
    • The appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt.
  • Clause (3) states that where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfies the High Court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the High Court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by sub-section (2).
  • Clause (4) states that an appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed—
    • In the case of an appeal to a Bench of the High Court, within thirty days.
    • In the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against.