Law of Contempt and Offences Against Administration of Justice

The impact of the administration of justice within a State has practical significance on the affairs of ordinary individuals and groups. First, the fair administration of justice is important for the rule of law in that it ensures state practice and policies protect against the ?infringement of the fundamental human rights to life, liberty, personal security and physical integrity of the person. Second, as the main vehicle for the protection of human rights at the national level, a system for administration of justice is necessary for the peace and stability of a State.

After 75 years of independence, the judiciary in the country is under a constant threat and being endangered both from internal and external forces. The need of the time is of restoring confidence, amongst the people for the independence of judiciary. Its impartiality and the glory of law has to be maintained, protected and strengthened. The confidence in the courts of justice, which the people possess, cannot in any way, be allowed to be tarnished, diminished or wiped out by contumacious behaviour of any person.

This is not unique to India. In the last two decades, in many countries of the common law, the general deference formerly paid to judges, has been eroded. Attacks on judges have now become commonplace. Many are now made by politiians who see mileage in that course. Regrettably beyond politicians, the attacks have been made by the media, public commentators, academicians and members of the legal profession, the last omitting to dress up their words in the respect for the judicial office which were formerly obtained.

The only weapon of protecting itself from the onslaught to the institution is the long hand of contempt of Court left in the armory of judicial repository which, when needed, can reach any neck howsoever high or far away it may be This is the comment of the Apex Court in re Arundhati Roy.

Thus, while accepting that a vibrant system of administration of justice is inevitable for any constitutional society, the Those who are entitled to claim protection from the rule of law include the social outcasts and marginalised people of our society. It is only if there is a willingness to protect the worst and the weakest among us, that all of us can be secure that our own rights will be protected, said the South African Constitutional Court in State v T Makwanyane and S Machunu.

Such needed protection to judicial and legislative institutions is given by the Contempt jurisprudence and also Indian Penal Code, Judges Protection Act etc. Though the Acts are different, their objective is same.

The purpose of law of contempt is to protect the machinery of justice and the interests of the public. In order to protect these dual interests, unwarranted interference with administration of justice must be prevented. The power to punish for contempt is conferred on Courts for two reasons. Firstly, that the Courts may be armed with the power to enforce their orders, Secondly, they may be able to punish obstruction to the administration of justice. To ensure these objectives, there are also constitutional provisions dealing with contempt of Courts, apart from Contempt of Courts Act. Under Article 215 of the Constitution of India, a Court of Record is a Court, the records of which are admitted being evidentiary value and not to be questioned when produced before any Court. Such a Court enjoys a power to punish for contempt as its inherent jurisdiction

Highlights:

• A unique commentary on issues of contemporary importance relating to Contempt of Court and offences by or against public servants and offences against Administration of justice;
• Subject wise topics arranged in handy way for easy reading;
• Reference to historical developments and both in Common law, Indian, Western and Asian jurisdictions;
• Comparative analysis with reference to Indian Penal Code, CrPC, CPC, Judges (Protection) Act, parliamentary privileges etc.
• Reference to relevant case law from India and other countries, up to May 2021, including unreported judgments;
• Cross references to Indian citations.