Analyzing Statements on Contempt of Court in India

Let's carefully examine each statement provided regarding the Contempt of Courts Act and the constitutional provisions related to contempt in India.

Statement 1: H.N. Sanyal Committee and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

This statement says that the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was enacted pursuant to the report of the H.N. Sanyal Committee. This is historically accurate. The committee, headed by Shri H.N. Sanyal, the then Additional Solicitor General of India, was constituted to review the law relating to contempt of court. Their report recommended the enactment of a comprehensive law to deal with contempt, leading to the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971.

Statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: Constitutional Powers of Supreme Court and High Courts

This statement asserts that the Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves. This is true. The Constitution grants this inherent power:

• Article 129 states that 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 states that 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.

These articles specifically empower the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt.

Statement 2 is correct.

Statement 3: Constitutional Definition of Civil and Criminal Contempt

This statement claims that the Constitution of India defines Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt. This is incorrect. While the Constitution empowers the courts to punish for contempt (as seen in Statements 2 and 4), it does not provide definitions for the different types of contempt, such as civil contempt and criminal contempt. These definitions are provided in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 itself.

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 defines:

• Civil Contempt: Wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
• Criminal Contempt: The publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, 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 proceeding; or (iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.

Statement 3 is incorrect.

Statement 4: Parliament's Power to Legislate on Contempt of Court

This statement says that in India, Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of Court. This is correct. The power to legislate on contempt of court is within the domain of Parliament (and State Legislatures). Specifically, Entry 14 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution lists "Contempt of Court, but not including contempt of the Supreme Court or of a High Court". However, Parliament's power to legislate regarding the powers and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts, read with their inherent power under Articles 129 and 215, allows Parliament to make laws like the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which supplements but does not supplant the constitutional power of the courts.

Statement 4 is correct.

Summary of Statements

Based on the analysis:

• Statement 1: Correct
• Statement 2: Correct
• Statement 3: Incorrect
• Statement 4: Correct

The statements that are correct are 1, 2, and 4.

Conclusion

The correct statements are 1, 2 and 4.

Revision Table: Contempt of Court Key Points

Additional Information: Understanding Contempt of Court

Contempt of Court refers to conduct that defies or disrespects the authority of a court of law. The power to punish for contempt is essential for the judiciary to maintain its dignity, authority, and the effective administration of justice.

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, serves as the primary legislation governing contempt proceedings in India. It codifies the law relating to contempt of court and defines the limits on the exercise of the power to punish for contempt. It categorizes contempt into Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt, as mentioned earlier.

While the Act defines contempt and procedures, the power of the Supreme Court and High Courts to punish for contempt is an inherent power derived directly from the Constitution (Articles 129 and 215). The 1971 Act does not take away this inherent power but rather regulates its exercise and provides specific defences.

Parliament's ability to legislate on this subject comes from the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States as outlined in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. This allows for a statutory framework to complement the constitutional provisions.