What Is Contempt of Court in India — Civil and Criminal Contempt Explained

Every court needs respect and obedience to function properly. If people start ignoring court orders or attacking the dignity of judges without any fear, the whole justice system will collapse. This is exactly why the law of contempt of court exists in India.

In simple words, contempt of court means any act which disrespects a court or comes in the way of justice being delivered properly. This topic is a regular favourite in the Judiciary Exam. Prelims papers often ask direct questions on sections of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, while Mains papers expect you to write a proper answer with case law support. Interview panels also like to test how well a candidate understands the balance between free speech and judicial dignity.

Students preparing under Nitesh Choubey Sir at Aashayein Judiciary are advised to master this topic thoroughly, since it connects constitutional law, criminal procedure, and current affairs all at once.

What Does Contempt of Court Mean

The Constitution of India does not define contempt of court anywhere. Article 129 gives the Supreme Court the power to punish for its own contempt, and Article 215 gives the same power to every High Court. These are called courts of record, and this power is treated as inherent, meaning it exists on its own and does not depend on any ordinary law.

The actual law that explains and regulates this power is the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. This Act divides contempt into two broad types.

●       Civil contempt

●       Criminal contempt

Let us understand both one by one.

Civil Contempt Explained

Section 2(b) of the Act defines civil contempt. In simple words, civil contempt happens when a person wilfully disobeys a judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or any other process of a court. It also covers a wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court.

Suppose a person promises the High Court that he will vacate a disputed shop within one month, and the court records this undertaking in its order. If that person does not vacate the shop even after the deadline, without any genuine reason, this will amount to civil contempt.

The word wilful is very important here. The disobedience must be intentional and deliberate. If a person could not comply because of circumstances beyond his control, courts generally do not treat it as contempt. In Ashok Paper Kamgar Union v. Dharam Godha, the Supreme Court explained that wilful means an act done consciously, with a bad motive to disobey the law, and not a mere failure caused by helplessness.

This means that civil contempt is mainly about protecting the authority of court orders and making sure that the machinery of justice is not made useless by disobedience.

Criminal Contempt Explained

Section 2(c) of the Act defines criminal contempt. According to this section, criminal contempt covers publication of any matter, or doing of any act, which:

●       Scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of any court, or

●       Prejudices or interferes with the due course of any judicial proceeding, or

●       Obstructs or tends to obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner.

Publication here has a wide meaning. It includes spoken or written words, signs, visible representation, newspapers, television, and social media posts as well.

In simple words, criminal contempt is not about disobeying a specific order. It is about attacking the dignity and credibility of the court itself, or creating hurdles in the fair conduct of a case. For example, spreading a false statement that a judge has taken a bribe in a pending case, without any proof, can amount to criminal contempt because it lowers the authority of the court and can influence public opinion about a case that is still being heard.

Defences and Exceptions Under the Act

The Act does not want to punish every criticism of the judiciary. Genuine and fair criticism is necessary in a democracy. That is why certain defences are available.

●       Innocent publication or distribution, where the person had no knowledge that a proceeding was pending (Section 3)

●       Fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings (Section 4)

●       Fair criticism of a judicial act (Section 5)

●       Truth as a valid defence, added by the 2006 amendment under Section 13, if it is in public interest and made in good faith

This means that a person can criticise a judgment or point out a mistake in a fair and respectful manner. What the law punishes is malicious, reckless or scandalous attack, not honest disagreement.

If you're preparing through online judiciary coaching, understanding anticipatory bail is essential. It protects a person from arrest in certain situations and is an important topic for judiciary prelims, mains, and interview preparation. 

Punishment for Contempt

Section 12 of the Act lays down the punishment. A person found guilty of contempt can be punished with simple imprisonment up to six months, or with fine up to two thousand rupees, or with both.

There is also a proviso which allows the accused to be discharged, or the punishment to be reduced, if he makes an apology to the satisfaction of the court. Courts in India generally prefer to accept a sincere apology rather than sending a person to jail, because the real purpose of contempt law is to protect the dignity of justice and not to take revenge.

Case Law Section

Case Name: In Re: Prashant Bhushan and Another

Citation: Suo Motu Contempt Petition (Criminal) No. 1 of 2020, Supreme Court of India (Judgment on conviction dated 14 August 2020, sentencing order dated 31 August 2020).

Facts

Advocate Prashant Bhushan posted two tweets in June 2020. One tweet was about the Chief Justice of India riding a motorcycle without a mask during the pandemic. The second tweet criticised the role played by the last four Chief Justices in the functioning of democracy. The Supreme Court took suo motu, meaning on its own motion, cognisance of these tweets and started contempt proceedings.

Issue Before the Court

Whether the two tweets amounted to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and whether the defence of truth under Section 13 could be applied.

Court's Decision

The Supreme Court held Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt on 14 August 2020. The Court found that the tweets were capable of shaking public confidence in the judiciary and went beyond fair criticism. On the question of truth as a defence, the Court held that the defence of truth is available only when it is raised in good faith and in public interest, and not as a shield for a deliberate and reckless attack on the institution. On 31 August 2020, the Court imposed a token fine of Rupee 1 as punishment.

Important Observations

The Court observed that the freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) permits fair criticism of the judiciary, but this freedom is subject to the reasonable restriction of contempt of court mentioned in Article 19(2). The Court also relied on the earlier Constitution Bench decision in Baradakanta Mishra v. Registrar of Orissa High Court, reported as (1974) 1 SCC 374, which distinguishes between vilification of a judge as an individual and vilification of a judge in his judicial capacity. Only the second situation attracts contempt jurisdiction.

Why the Case Is Important

This case is important because it sets the boundary between the right to criticise the judiciary and the offence of scandalising the court. As explained by Nitesh Choubey Sir during Judiciary Preparation sessions at Aashayein Judiciary, this case is a favourite for both objective and descriptive papers because it connects three subjects together, namely constitutional law, contempt law, and current affairs.

Exam Relevance

Prelims POV

●       Sections 2(b) and 2(c) defining civil and criminal contempt are frequently asked in objective papers

●       Punishment under Section 12 and the maximum limit of six months imprisonment or two thousand rupees fine

●       Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution granting contempt power to the Supreme Court and High Courts

●       Defences under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 13

●       PYQ style questions often test whether a statement is civil contempt or criminal contempt through a fact based situation

Mains POV

For Mains answer writing, always start with the constitutional basis under Articles 129 and 215, then move to the statutory definition under the Contempt of Courts Act, then discuss the balance between free speech and judicial dignity with support of the Prashant Bhushan case. Mentioning the truth defence added in 2006 shows depth of preparation.

Interview POV

Interview panels often ask a simple question such as, should criticism of judges be allowed. A good answer explains that fair and bona fide criticism strengthens democracy, but reckless and malicious statements which damage public confidence in courts cannot be protected as free speech. This shows balanced thinking, which panels appreciate.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the difference between civil contempt and criminal contempt?

Civil contempt means disobeying a court order or breaking an undertaking given to the court. Criminal contempt means scandalising the court or interfering with the administration of justice.

2. Which law defines contempt of court in India?

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 defines and regulates contempt of court in India, along with Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution.

3. What is the maximum punishment for contempt of court?

Under Section 12 of the Act, the maximum punishment is simple imprisonment up to six months, or a fine up to two thousand rupees, or both.

4. Can truth be used as a defence in a contempt case?

Yes. After the 2006 amendment, Section 13 allows truth as a defence if it is in public interest and made in good faith.

5. Is criticism of a judgment always contempt?

No. Fair and reasonable criticism of a judicial act made in good faith is protected under Section 5 and does not amount to contempt.

Conclusion

Contempt of court is a topic that keeps coming back in judiciary exams because it touches the daily working of courts. In simple words, the law tries to protect judicial dignity without shutting down honest criticism. Students preparing for the Civil Judge Exam and PCS J Exam should read the bare Act carefully along with the Prashant Bhushan judgment to build a complete answer.

Aashayein Judiciary continues to provide updated Judiciary Notes and Judiciary Study Material on such topics to help aspirants stay exam ready. According to the teaching approach followed at Aashayein Judiciary, understanding the reasoning behind a judgment is far more useful than memorising it, and this approach helps students perform well in Judiciary Mains and Judiciary Interview rounds alike.