Procrustean Bed* Awaits JNU Community

Resist it through Historical Referendum on 20th April
Denigration of the wisdom of common students of the campus is unacceptable but understandable. Misplaced attempts to undertake spineless, anonymous and naïve acts in the name of common students discredit their voice. This could be and should be avoided and resisted. Motivated and vitiated news reports in media violate sacred canons of journalism and appear to be part of a design of those political forces who find JNU’s stature as an institution of eminence and stature an eyesore.

If institutions like JNU are allowed to cave in to such tactics, it takes a colossal toll and abets “institutional crimes” like the one noted by the Delhi High Court, which referred to "the utterly indefensible conduct" of the present regime, terming it as akin to "the writ of a monarch in medieval times" "who could run unquestioned" and who was "accountable to none". Such a regime is indeed "disquieting", the court observed. The Referendum is an occasion to undo the pre-planned assault and to retrieve JNU’s honour. A large number of students in JNU have been denied the democratic right to participate in student elections so far, here is an opportunity undo the same.

Student community of JNU of all shades must ponder over the ulterior motives that are manifest in the pattern of such acts and their reporting which appears as “paid news” to give it a bad name, in a calculated move to kill JNU in installments. Disruptive actions and unruliness witnessed in the campus a while ago is unbecoming of students. It is a consequence of glaring ignorance about what constitutes a considered political intervention and an inability to see through the objective of such machinations. Miscreants of dubious hues may be forgiven for their flippancy; after all, they have been deprived of political education by the higher judiciary. This unprecedented Referendum is the submission by the student community of its public approval/disapproval of current state of affairs. It is also an exercise in political education.

Notwithstanding one’s academic pre-occupations, if one is a student of JNU and has never ever participated in its election process, it is indeed a matter of regret for a life time. What will one tell the coming generations about the vibrant political culture of JNU. If one has participated in it, the proposed Referendum on 20th April becomes all the more significant for the JNU student community. The present regime is anti-student, anti-woman, anti-worker and anti-environment. It’s a Referendum to change the rot in the present system that is brutally changing the landscape of the JNU both literally and figuratively.

In its megalomania, a psychopathological condition that is characterized by delusional fantasies, the present regime has pre-decided the role and thoughts of the student community on seminal issues of national importance, to be apolitical and expects them to act like an anti-politics machine. The present regime, it acolytes and beneficiaries want students to be of same shape and size. It wants them to be put on Procrustean bed*. Any attempt to reduce men to one standard, one way of thinking, or one way of acting, is called placing them on Procrustes’ bed, and the person who makes the attempt is called Procrustes.

Procrustes was a robber of Attica, who placed all who fell into his hands upon an iron bed. If they were longer than the bed, he cut off the redundant part; if shorter, he stretched them till they fitted it. You know, for sure, who is this Procrustes in the JNU campus.

This Referendum provides a historical opportunity to participate in an election process to resist impudent efforts to fiddle with the JNU Act and Statutes against the wishes of the JNU community. Over the last several years, vested interests have developed in the campus some of whom have been exposed; some others would be exposed if and only if JNU gets a new regime.

Referendum is an absolute inalienable right of the people to decide and determine the path and destiny of the University, to choose anew and change its direction. This democratic process invites you to join hands with the student community and the larger JNU community in a moment of crisis. All sane common students have a duty to protect JNU and its glorious heritage from the civil rights robbery, which was attempted recently, by participating in the 20th April Referendum.

Student Election in Jawaharlal Nehru University(JNU)

To

Dr. M. Veerappa Moily
Hon'ble Union Minister for Law and Justice
Government of India
4th Floor, A-Wing,
Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi-110 001
Email: vmoily@kar.nic.in

Subject-Student Election in Jawaharlal Nehru University(JNU)

Sir,

On behalf of the student of Jawaharlal Nehru University [JNU], we wish to draw your urgent attention towards the stay order on the election of Jawaharlal Nehru University Student Union passed on 24.10.2008 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The subsequent bench of the Hon’ble Court itself recognized in its order dated 11.11.2009 that the said order is an interference in the Fundamental Right of Expression and forming an Association and it observed “the case may be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for referring the questions before the Constitution Bench.”

Hon’ble Court averred, “There is broad separation of powers under the Constitution, and hence one organ of the State should not encroach into the domain of another organ.”

The stay on the JNU’s student union election is resulting in gradual non-participation of students in the matters of public and national interest. The vibrant and lively political culture which had developed in the University campus as a consequence is under erosion. Everybody feels that it is necessary to revive the student’s union at the earliest.

JNU is the only university in the country where students conduct their own elections in accordance with their Jawaharlal Nehru University Student Union (JNUSU) Constitution framed by the students themselves, without any support, control or interference of any kind from the university administration or from any of its departments. This process of conducting elections has been in vogue for more than 37 years. Elections are highly structured and regulated. The elections are conducted peacefully, harmoniously and on the basis of self-imposed discipline as given in the JNUSU Constitution and the Code of Conduct which is made applicable by the JNUSU Election Committee when the elections are announced.

It is acknowledged by the University Authorities as well as eminent people in different walks of life. Lyngodh Committee which was looking into the vice of money and muscle power in student election, made several recommendations to the Supreme Court wherein it recognized the JNUSU as a role model. The Supreme Court instead of looking at the real issue, stayed the student’s elections nearly two years back.

The JNUSU’s Constitution, Code of Conduct and Grievance Redressal Mechanism are more democratic and evolved than elections conducted elsewhere. It is consensual in nature and is protected by Article 19 of the Constitution: forming an association and following a method based on certain ideas/ ideals/views which are covered by the Freedom of Expression.

In view of the fact that keeping student elections in abeyance does not appear rational, we submit that the law officers of the government may be suitably instructed to ensure hearing of this matter expeditiously so that the elections are conducted in the JNU at the earliest.

Yours faithfully

Appeal to the JNU Student Community

Please sign on this appeal & tell your friends too


Appeal to the JNU Student Community

Dear friends,

One is witness to perhaps an unprecedented division among the student community in recent memory of JNU. In a context where the supreme interest of student community is at stake as a consequence of the stay on the JNUSU elections, absence of due process within the Joint Struggle Committee and engineered fracture in the student’s unity, we are making an appeal for unanimous action henceforth.

Amidst a manifest conflict between the optimists and pessimists of the campus, the undersigned call upon the student community to ensure that only those resolutions are placed before the 9th Feb. 2010 University General Body Meeting (UGBM) which can be passed unanimously. There are precedents for the same. This would strengthen the resolve of the entire student community to stand firm in face of the irrational and unconstitutional stay on the JNUSU elections. We are in an extra-ordinary situation akin to those instances wherein the most fractured legislatures both in India and in the world have passed unanimous resolutions. We demand that an all party meeting/JSC meeting should be convened urgently to finalize the text of teh resolution before the UGBM.

While this is an appeal for the entire JNU student community, it is primarily aimed at those students who are not affiliated to the political organizations. This is especially an invitation to those students who have so far been deprived the opportunity to participate in the student election process and to enrich JNU’s vibrant culture.

Saintly and sane interventions and conscience keepers have a role even in JNU campus. We invite the student community to endorse this call for unity for unanimity and for a consensual future course of political and legal action.

Signatures

Reclaim the Supremacy of the Joint Struggle Committee of JNU

Reclaim the Supremacy of the Joint Struggle Committee

The current Solicitor General for India has given a puzzle to the JNU student community to solve. One must appreciate and acknowledge that so far our Joint Struggle Committee has shown earth shaking patience and wisdom in dealing with the poser from Government of India through him. What Solicitor General for India has failed to achieve is to make JNU students perfect conformists. As JNU student community we are at times so self critical that we fail to discern how we have put the legal acumen of the apex court and government of India under rigorous scrutiny.
Be the witness of these historic moments but do not let impatience of any sort nullify our combined achievements. It is good to be argumentative but beware of the busy-body, the ungrateful, arrogant, deceitful, envious and the unsocial. Do recollect what Marcus Aurelius (105 BC) says in Meditations, "Constantly bring to thy recollection those who have complained greatly about anything, those who have been most conspicuous by the greatest fame or misfortunes or enmities or fortunes of any kind: then think where are they all now? Smoke and ash and a tale, or not even a tale."

We must take constant cognizance of the Joint Struggle Committee which has been constituted by the students of JNU through a University General Body Meeting on 25th October 2008. The Resolution of this UGBM reads:

This UGBM expresses its distress at the Supreme Court order to stay the JNUSU election process for non-conformity to the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations. This UGBM resolves to defend the JNUSU Constitution and our unique election process. To carry forward this struggle in a united manner, this UGBM convenes a joint struggle committee: The Committee should be convened by the existing JNUSU Council, and should comprise of the existing JNUSU Council, two representatives from each student organization and concerned individuals…All future decisions and endeavours to defend the JNUSU Constitution and our unique election process, must be taken by this Committee. The decisions taken by this Committee will be final. No unilateralism should be shown at this juncture from any quarter…This UGBM empowers the Committee to decide on all appropriate actions in the future course of struggle.

The relevant prayers (ad verbatim) of the Joint Struggle Committee in the Supreme Court is as under:

PRAYER
That in view of the above, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to :

(i) Accept the submissions/suggestions of the Joint Struggle Committee of which JNUSU is a part and vacate the stay order passed on 24.10.2008.

(ii)Accept the apology for not bringing the suggestions/views of JNUSU on the Lyngdoh Committee for consideration of this Hon’ble Court earlier.

What is missing from the debate is the audit of the work done by the Joint Struggle Committee of students of JNU which consists of JNUSU and student organizations i.e. AIDSO, AISA, AISF, ABVP, DSU, PSU, NSUI and SFI. What merits attention is to ensure that no miscreant succeeds in diluting and undermining the mandate of the Joint Struggle Committee. Under the extraordinary circumstances with which the JNU student community is faced with what today’s UGBM must do among other things is to empower the Joint Struggle Committee so that its supremacy over JNUSU and other student organisations remains intact. Do "Remember the arguments by which it has been proved that the world is a kind of political community, and be quiet at last", says Marcus Aurelius. As a student community we are one and we are faced with the whims and fancies of the nation- states and non-nation states, we must use our intellectual capital and the social capital to safeguard JNU as a place to cherish for generations to come. In literature we note that in crisis a character evolves, in the current crisis too JNU student community would evolve to inject motion in stagnant entities. We must salute the work done by the Joint Struggle Committee and tell them in the words of a poet ,

"If you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,

But make allowance for their doubting too;

If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,

Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,

Or, being hated, don't give way to hating,

And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise;....

If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken

Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools",

JNU student community would have gained the trust (amidst the flood of ulterior motives of political outfits) in themselves to take on the might of both the states and non-states and still remain resilient to be ready for the next struggle. Attempts to prove the student community incompetent must be defeated under the leadership of the Joint Struggle Committee, to solve the riddle and to bring back the normal democratic process that has the historical legacy of giving befitting reply to the lethal designs.

----- Gopal Krishna, Prakash K Ray, Shashank Y

Drafted on 4 December, 2010

Supreme Court contempt order for JNU VC & on JNUSU elections

IT E M NO.5 4 COUR T NO.3 SEC T I O N XIA

S UP R E M E C OUR T O F I N D I A
R ECO R D OF P R OC E E D I N G S

IA 1 2 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).2 4 2 9 5 / 2 0 0 4

(From the judgement and order dated 24 / 0 6 / 2 0 0 4 in W P No. 3 0 8 4 5 / 2 0 0 3 of
The HIGH COUR T OF K E R A L A AT E R N A K U L A M )

UNIV E R S I T Y OF K E R A L A Petitioner(s)

VER SUS

COUNCI L, P R I N C I P A L S ',CO L L E G E S , K E R A L A &OR S Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for direction/implead ment and office report ))

Date: 24 / 1 0 / 2 0 0 8 This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
HON'B L E Dr. JUS T I C E ARI J I T PA S A Y A T
HON'B L E DR. JUS T I C E MUKUN D A K A M SHA R M A


Mr. Gopal Subra m a n i u m, ASG (A.C.)
Mr. Abhishek Tewari, Adv.
Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv.

For appearing parties

For J NU Students Mr. Sanjay P a r i k h, Adv.
Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Adv.
Mr. Jitin Sahni, adv.
Ms. Mamta Saxena, Adv.
Mr. A.N. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Tyagi, Adv.

For Registra r, Mr. H.K. Puri, adv.
J. L.N.U. Mr. S.K. Pu ri, adv.
Mr. V.M. Chauhan, Adv.
Ms. Priya Pu ri, Adv.

For Youth for Mr. M.L. Lahoty, adv.
eqauality
Mr. R. Sathish,Adv.

Mr. E.M.S. Anam,Adv.

Mr. Anil K. Jh a ,Adv

Mr. Gopal Singh ,Adv

Mr. R.C. Kohli ,Adv

Mr. K.R . Sasiprabhu ,Adv

Mr. Ajit Ku m a r Sinha ,Adv

Mr. M.K. Michael ,Adv

Mr. M.K.D. Namboodiri ,Adv

Mr. V.G. P r aga s a m ,Adv


MCI & DCI Mr. Maninder Singh ,Adv
Ms. Pr athiba M. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Shar m a , Adv.
Mr. Sumeet Bhatia, Adv.

Mr. Shivaji M. J adh av ,Adv

Mr. N. Kotiswa r, Advocate General
Mr.K hw a i r a k p a m Nobin Singh ,Adv


Mr. Radha Shya m Jen a ,Adv

Mr. S. Chandr a Shekh a r ,Adv

Mr. P.V. Dinesh ,Adv

Mr. Manish Ku m a r, Adv.
Mr. Ansar Ahmad Chaudha ry ,Adv
Mr. Satya P r a k a s h , Adv.
Ms. Pro mil a Matta, Adv.

Mr.T.V.George ,Adv

Mr. Shail Ku m a r Dwivedi, Adv.


State of Mizora m Mr. K.N. Madhusoodhan a n, Adv.



UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
OR D E R


We had issued notice in this case on 20th October, 2 0 0 8 when the learned Amicus Curiae brought to our notice that the elections to the Students Union of J awa h a r l a l Nehru University are being held contrary to the guidelines given and recommend ations made by the Lyngdoh Committee which were accepted by this Court's Order dated 2 2. 9 . 2 0 0 6 . It was categorically indicated that the recommendations were to be implemented and guidelines followed in respect of elections of all Colleges/Universities until further orders.

Since the elections to the Students Union in the Jawaharlal Nehru University are being held apparently contrary to the norms fixed by the Lyngdoh Committee and approved by this Court, there is prima facie contempt of this Court's Order.

Issue notice to the Vice Chancellor and the Registrar of the Jawaharlal Nehru University to show cause as to why action for contempt shall not be taken against them for acting in violation of this Court's Order dated 22. 9 . 2 0 0 6 .

The elections which are scheduled to be held on 3rd November, 2008 shall remain stayed until further orders.

If fresh elections in line with the recommendations made by the Lyngdoh Committee as approved by this Court are held there shall not be any bar on the same.

The personal presence of the Vice Chancellor and the Registrar is dispensed with for the present.

Learned Amicus Curiae brought to our notice a news item about vandalism of students of Samanta Chandra Sekhar College, Puri in Orissa when the college authorities wanted to implement the Lyngdoh Committee's recommendations in terms of this Court's Order for the College Union Election. We direct the Superintendent of Police, Puri to register criminal cases against all the students who had indulged in such vandalism.

Issue notice to the Vice Chancellor of the Utkal University and Principal of the Sam a nta Chandra Sekhar College, Puri to indicate as to what steps have been taken against the students who indulged in such vandalis m including steps for their expulsion from the College.

The matter shall be listed on 8 th December, 2008 . All the connected matters shall also be listed on 8 th December, 2008.


(Sukhbir Paul Kau r) (Shashi Bala Vij)
Court Master Court Master

Recommendations of the Lyngdoh Committee on the
Student Elections

The recommendations of the Lyngdoh Committee on the Student Elections accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for implementation:-

6.1.1 Universities and colleges across the country must ordinarily conduct elections for the appointment of students to student representative bodies. These elections may be conducted in the manner prescribed herein, or in a manner that conforms to the standards prescribed herein.

6.1.2 Where the atmosphere of the University campus is adverse to the conduct
of peaceful, free and fair elections, the University, its constituent colleges
and departments must initiate a system of student representation based on nominations, especially where elections are being held at present. It would be advisable, however, not to base such nomination system on purely academic merit, as is being practiced throughout the country.

6.1.3 In cases where elections are not being held, or where the nomination model prevails, the nomination model should be allowed to continue for a limited period of time. It is to be noted that the nomination system suffers from several flaws, and must only be restored to as an INTERIM MEASURE.

6.1.4 Subject to the recommendations in respect of the possible model of elections, all institutions must over a period of 5 years, convert from the nomination model to a structured election model, that may be based on a system of parliamentary (indirect) elections, or on the presidential (direct) system, or a hybrid of both. It is highly desirable that all institutions follow this mechanism of gradual conversion, especially for privately funded institutions that prefer a status quo situation.

6.1.5 All institutions must conduct a review of the student representation mechanism. The first review may be conducted after a period of 2 years of the implementation of the mechanism detailed above, and the second review may be conducted after the 3rd or the 4th year of implementation. The primary objective of these reviews will be to
ascertain the success of the representation and election mechanism in each individual institutions, so as to decide whether or not to implement a full-fledged election structure. Needless to say these reviews will be based on a consideration of the views and suggestions of all stakeholders, such as students, faculty, administration, student bodies, and parents.

6.1.6 Institutions must, as a primary objective, subject to the pertinent issue of
discipline on campus, seek to implement a structured system of student elections by conclusion of a period of 5 years from the date of the implementation of the recommendations.

6.1.7 Subject to the autonomy of the universities in respect of the choice of the
mode of election, all universities must institute an apex student representative body that represents all students, colleges, and departments coming under the particular university. In the event that the university is geographically widespread, individual colleges may constitute their own representative bodies, which would further elect representatives for the apex universities body.

6.1.8 The union/representative body so elected shall only comprise of regular students on the rolls of the institution. No faculty member, nor any member of the administration shall be permitted to hold any post on the executive of such representative body, nor shall be allowed to be a member of any such representative body.

6.2 Modes of Elections.

6.2.1 A system of direct election of the office bearers of the student body, whereby all students of all constituent colleges, as well as all students of university departments vote directly for the office bearers. This model may be followed in smaller universities with well-defined single campuses (for e.g. JNU/University of Hyderabad), and with a relatively smaller student population. A graphic representation of this model is annexed herewith at Annexure IV-A.

In respect of universities with large, widespread campuses and large student bodies either of the following models may be adopted.

6.2.2 A system of elections, where colleges and campuses directly elect college and campus office bearers, as well as university representatives. The University representatives form an electoral college, which shall elect the University student union office bearers. A graphic representation of this model is annexed herewith at Annexure IV-B.

6.2.3 A system of elections where on one hand, directly elected class representative elect the office bearers of the college as well as the university representatives, and the campus itself directly elects the campus office bearers and the university representatives. The university representatives shall form an electoral college, which shall elect the office bearer of the university student union. A graphic representation of this model is annexed herewith at Annexure IV-C.

6.2.4 A system of election wherein class representatives shall be directly elected in the colleges and universities campus and they in turn shall elect the office bearers for the college unions and the university campus union. Also they shall elect their representatives for university student union.

These elected representative from colleges and university campus shall form the electoral colleges, which shall elect the office bearers of the university student union. This model shall be applicable to large university with large number of affiliated colleges. A graphic representation of this model is annexed herewith at Annexure IV-D.

6.3 Disassociation of Student Elections and Student Representation from Political Parties.

6.3.1 During the period of the elections no person, who is not a student on the rolls of the college/university, shall be permitted to take part in the election process in any capacity. Any person, candidate, or member of the student organization, violating this rule shall be subject to disciplinary proceedings, in addition to the candidature, as the case may be being revoked.

6.4 Frequency and Duration of Election Proces

6.4.1 it is recommended that the entire process of elections, commencing from the date of filing of nomination papers to the date of declaration of results, including the campaign period, should not exceed 10 days.

6.4.2 It is further recommended that elections be held on a yearly basis and that the same should be held between 6 to 8 weeks from the date of commencement of the academic session.

6.5 Eligibility Criteria for Candidates

6.5.1 Under-graduate students between the ages of 17 and 22 may contest elections. This age range may be appropriately relaxed in the case of professional college, where course often range between 4 to 5 years.

6.5.2 For Post graduate students the maximum age limit to legitimately contest an election would be 24 – 25 years.

6.5.3 For research students the maximum age limit to legitimately contest an election would be 28 years.

6.5.4 Although, the committee would refrain from prescribing any particular minimum marks to be attained by candidate, the candidate should in no event have any academic arrears in the year of contesting the election.

6.5.5 The candidate should have attained the minimum percentage of attendance as prescribed by the University of 75% Attendance, whichever is higher.

6.5.6 The candidate shall have one opportunity to contest for the post of office
bearer, and two opportunities to contest for the post of an executive member.

6.5.7 The candidate shall not have a previous criminal record, that is to say he
should not have been tried and/or convicted of any criminal offence or misdemeanor. The candidate shall also not have been subject to any disciplinary action by the University authorities.

6.5.8 The candidate must be a regular, full time student of the college/university and should not be a distance/proximate education student. That is to say that all eligible candidates must be enrolled in a full time course, the course duration being at least one year.

6.6 Election – Related Expenditure and Financial Accountability

6.6.1 The maximum permitted expenditure per candidate shall be Rs.5000/-

6.6.2 Each candidate shall, within two weeks of the declaration of the result,
submit complete and audited accounts to the college/university authorities. The College/university shall publish such audited accounts within 2 days of submission of such accounts, through a suitable medium so that any member of the student body may freely examine the same.

6.6.3 The election of the candidate will be nullified in the event of any noncompliance
or in the event of any excessive expenditure.

6.6.4 With the view to prevent the inflow of funds from political parties into the
student election process, the candidates are specially barred from utilizing funds from any other sources than voluntary contributions from the student body.

6.7 Code of conduct for candidates and Elections Administrators

6.7.1 No candidate shall indulge in nor shall abet, any activity, which may aggravate existing differences or create mutual hatred or cause tension between different castes and communities, religious or linguistic, or between any group(s) of students.

6.7.2 Criticism of other candidates, when made, shall be confined to their policies and programs, past record and work. Candidates shall refrain from criticism of all aspects of private life, not connected with the public activities of the other candidates or supporters of such other candidates.

Criticism of other candidates, or their supporters based on unverified
allegations or distortion shall be avoided.

6.7.3 There shall be no appeal to caste or communal feelings for securing votes. Places of workshop, within or without the campus shall not be used for election propaganda.

6.7.4 All candidates shall be prohibited from indulging or abetting, all activities
which are considered to be “corrupt practices” and offences, such asbribing of voters, intimidation of voters, impersonation of voters canvassing or the use of propaganda within 100 meters of polling stations, holding public meetings during the period of 24 hours ending with the hour fixed for the close of the poll and the transport and conveyance of voters to and from polling station.

6.7.5 No candidate shall be permitted to make use of printed posters, printed
pamphlets, or any other printed material for the purpose of canvassing. Candidates may only utilize hand-made posters for the purpose of canvassing, provided that such hand-made posters are procured within the expenditure limit set out herein above.

6.7.6 Candidates may only utilize hand-made posters at certain places in the
campus, which shall be notified in advance by the election commission/university authority.

6.7.7 No candidate shall be permitted to carry out processions, or public meetings, or in any way canvass or distribute propaganda outside the university/college campus.

6.7.8 No candidate shall, nor shall his/her supporters, deface or cause any
destruction to any property of the university/colleges campus, for any purpose whatsoever, without the prior written permission of the college/university authorities. AU candidates shall be held jointly and severally liable for any destruction/defacing of any university/college property.

6.7.9 During the election period the candidates may hold processions and / or
public meetings, provided that such processions and/or public meetings do not, in any manner, disturb the classes and other academic and cocurricular activities of the college/university. Further, such procession/public meeting may not be held without the period written permission of the college/university authority.

6.7.10 the use of loudspeakers, vehicles and animals for the purpose of canvassing shall be prohibited.

6.7.11 On the day of polling, student organizations and candidates shall.
(i) co-operate with the officers on election duty to ensure peaceful and orderly polling and complete freedom to the voters to exercise their franchise without being subjected to any annoyance or obstruction;
(ii) not serve or distribute any eatables, or other solid and liquid consumables, except water on polling day;
(iii) not hand out any propaganda on the polling day.

6.7.12 Excepting the voters, no one without a valid pass/letters of authority from
the election commission or from the college/university authorities shall enter the polling booths.

6.7.13 The election commission/college/university authorities shall appoint impartial observers. In the case of deemed universities and self-financed institutions, government servants may be appointed as observers. If the candidates have any specific complaint or problem regarding the conduct of the elections they may bring the same to the notice of the observer. Observers shall also be appointed to oversee the process of nomination of students in institutions that are following the nominations model of student representation.

6.7.14 All candidates shall be jointly responsible for ensuring the cleaning up of
the polling area within 48 hours of the conclusion of polling.

6.7.15 Any contravention of any of the above recommendations may make the candidate liable to be stripped of his candidature, or his elected post, as the case may be. The election commission/college/university authorities may also take appropriate disciplinary action against such a violator.

6.7.16 In addition to the above-mentioned code of conduct, it is also recommended that certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1960 (Section 153-A and Chapter IX-A – “Offences Relating to Election”), mayalso be made applicable to student elections.

6.8 Grievances Redressal Mechanism

6.8.1 There should be a Grievances Redressal Cell with the Dean (Student
Welfare)/teacher in charge of student affairs as its chairman. In addition, one senior faculty member, one senior administrative officer and two final year students – one boy and one girl (till the election results declared,students can be nominated on the basis of merit and/or participation in the co-curricular activities in the previous year). The grievance cell shall be mandated with the redressal of election-related grievance, including, but not limited to breaches of the code of conduct of elections and complaints relating to election-realted expenditure. This cell would be the
regular unit of the institution.

6.8.2 In pursuit of its duties, the grievance cell may prosecute violators of any
aspect of the code of conduct or the rulings of the grievance cell. The grievance cell shall serve as the court of original jurisdiction. The institutional head shall have appellate jurisdiction over issues of law and fact in all cases or controversies arising out of the conduct of the elections in which the grievance cell has issued a final decision. Upon review, the institutional head may revoke or modify the sanctions imposed by the grievance cell.

6.8.3 In carrying out the duties of the office, the Grievance cell shall conduct
proceedings and hearing necessary to fulfill those duties. In executing those duties they shall have the authority:
(i) to issue a writ of subpoena to compel candidates, agents, and workers, and to request students to appear and give testimony, as well as produce necessary records; and
(ii) to inspect the financial reports of any candidate and make these records available for public scrutiny upon request.

6.8.4 Members of the Grievance cell are prohibited from filing complaints. Any
other student may file a complaint with the Grievance cell, within a period of 3 weeks from the date of declaration of results. All complaints must be filed under the name of the student filing the complaint. The Grievance cell shall act on all complaints within 24 hours after they are received by either dismissing them or calling a hearing.

6.8.5 The Grievance cell may dismiss a complaint if
(i) The complaint was not filed within the time frame prescribed in Recommendation 8.4 above;
(ii) The complaint fails to state a cause of action for which relief may be granted.
(iii) the complainant has not and/or likely will not suffer injury or damage.
6.8.6 If a complaint is not dismissed, then a hearing must be held. The
Grievance cell shall inform, in writing, or via e-mail, the complaining party and individuals or groups named in the complaint of the time and place of the hearing. The parties are not considered notified until they have received a copy of the complaint.

6.8.7 The hearing shall be held at the earliest possible time, but not within twenty-four (24) hours after receipt of the notice described above, unless all parties agree to waive the 24 hour time constraint.

6.8.8 At the time, notice of hearing is issued, the Grievance Cell, by majority
vote, may issue a temporary restraining order, if it determines that such action is necessary to prevent undue or adverse effects one any individual or entity. Any restraining order, once issued, will remain in effect until a decision of the Grievance Cell is announced after the hearing or until rescinded by the Grievance Cell.

6.8.9 All Grievance Cell hearing, proceedings, and meetings must be open to the public.

6.8.10 All parties of the Grievance Cell hearing shall present themselves at the
hearing, may be accompanied by any other student from which they can receive counsel, and have the option to be represented by that counsel.

6.8.11 For any hearing, a majority of sitting Grievance Cell members must be in
attendance with the Chair of the Grievance Cell presiding. In the absence of the Chair, the responsibility to preside shall fall to an Grievance Cell member designated by the Chair.

6.8.12 The Grievance cell determine the format for the hearing, but must require that both the complaining and responding parties appear physically before the board to discuss the issues through a complaint, answered rebuttal, and rejoinder format. The purpose of the hearing is to gather the information necessary to make a decision, order, or ruling that will resolve an election dispute. To effectuate this purpose, the following rules should prevail at all hearings:
* Complaining parties shall be allowed no more than two witnesses, however, the Grievance cell may call witnesses as required. If said witnesses are unable to appear at the hearing, signed affidavits may be submitted to the Grievance Cell Chair for the purpose of testifying by proxy.
* All questions and discussions by the parties in dispute shall be directed to the Grievance Cell.
* There shall be no direct or cross-examination of any party or witness by complaining or responding parties during hearings.
* Reasonable time limits may be set by the Grievance Cell provided they give fare and equal treatment to both sides.
* The complaining party shall bear the burden of proof.
* Decisions, orders and rulings of the Grievance Cell must be concurred to by a majority of the Grievance Cell present and shall be announced as soon as possible after the hearing. The Grievance cell shall issue a written opinion of the ruling within 12 hours of announcement of the decision. The written opinion must
set forth the findings of fact by the Grievance Cell and the conclusions of law in support of it. Written opinions shall set a precedent for a time period of three election cycles for Grievance Cell ruling, and shall guide the Grievance Cell in its proceedings.

Upon consideration of prior written opinions, the grievance cell may negate the decision, but must provide written documentation of reasons for doing so.

* If the decision of the Grievance Cell is appealed to the institutional head, the Grievance Cell must immediately submits its ruling to the commission.
* The Grievance Cell shall select the remedy or sanction most appropriate to both the type and severity of the infraction, as well as the stand of mind or intent of the violator as determined by the Grievance Cell. Possible remedies and sanctions include, but are not limited to, fines, suspension of campaigning privileges, and
disqualification from the election.

* Any fine or total amount of fines against a candidate in an election cycle may not exceed the spending limit as defined herein above.
* If, after a hearing, the Grievance Cell finds that provisions of this
Code were violated by a candidate, or a candidate’s agent orworkers, the Grievance Cell may restrict the candidate, or the candidates agents or workers, from engaging in some or all campaign activities for some or all of the remainder of the campaign. If an order is issued covering only part of the remaining period, it shall take effect immediately so that after its termination, the candidate will have an opportunity to resume campaigning during the days immediately prior to and including the election
days.
* If, after a hearing, the Grievance Cell finds that provisions of either this Code or decisions, opinions, orders, or ruling of the Grievance Cell have been willfully and blatantly violated by a candidate, or a candidate’s agents or workers, the Grievance Cell may disqualifythe candidate.
* Any party adversely affected by a decision of the Grievance Cell may file an appeal with the institutional head within twenty four (24) hours after the adverse decision is announced. The institutional head shall have discretionary appellate jurisdiction over the Grievance Cell in all cases in which error on the part of the Grievance Cell is charged.
* The decision of the Grievance cell shall stand and shall have full effect until the appeal is heard and decided by the institutional heard.
* The institutional head shall hear appeals of Grievance Cell rulings as soon as possible, but not within twenty four (24) hours after the Grievance cell delivers to the Appellant and the institutional head a copy of its written opinion in the case. Appeal may be heard prior to this time, but only if the Appellant waives the right to a written opinion and the institutional head agrees to accept the waiver.
* The institutional head can issue suitable orders to suspend or halt the operation of the ruling issued by the Grievance Cell until the appeals are decided.
* The institutional head shall review findings of the Grievance cell when appealed. The institutional head may affirm or overturn the decision of the Grievance Cell, or modify the sanctions imposed.
6.9 Maintaining Law and order on the campus during the Election Process.

6.9.1 Any instance of acute lawlessness or the commission of a criminal offence shall be reported to the police by the University college authorities as soon as possible, but not later than 12 hours after the alleged commission of the offence.

6.10 Miscellaneous Recommendations
6.10.1 Student representation is essential to the overall development of students,
and, therefore, it is recommended that university statutes should expressly provide for student representation.

6.10.2 Student representation should be regulated by statute (either a Central Statute, State Statute or individual university statutes), incorporating the
recommendations prescribed herein.

6.10.3 The institution should organize leadership – training programs with the help
of professional organizations so as to groom and instill in student’sleadership qualities.

6.10.4 In the event of the office of any major post of office bearers failing vacant
within two months of elections, re-elections should be conducted; otherwise the Vice-President may be promoted to be post of President and Joint Secretary to the post of Secretary, as the case may be.

Judging Your Judges

Rakesh Tiwari, Additional Sessions Judge of in Delhi, would not have imagined in his wildest dreams that one day his name would make headlines altogether for wrong reasons. The manner in which the Delhi High Courts upbraided him for his ignorance about even elementary knowledge of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) has been widely reported. The said judge has also been asked to go on a one month study leave to upgrade his knowledge of the basics.

Close on the heels of the admonishment has come the news about the cautioning on parts of the highest courts of the country about the arbitrary issuance of non-bailable warrant. A three member jury headed by the Chief Justice himself has asked the judiciary to make proper balancing between right to personal liberty and the need to safeguard the interests of society in all such cases.

While these news have rightly made headlines, a study about the subordinate judiciary covering six states, sponsored by the UNDP, has not received the attention it deserves.Interestingly Jharkhand, which is one of the six states, has come out with its report first. Monitored by a high court judge, the aim of the study was to find out barriers if any in providing access to justice for the underprivileged sections of our society.

And conclusions of the study are not at all flattering for the judiciary. As reported in a section of the press it ' brutally confirms the stereotypes of ignorance, indifference and inefficiency that mark the administration of justice in the lower courts.'(The Telegraph, 27 April 2007) The study makes it clear that despite spending five hours in the court, a subordinate judge in any of the district courts generally disposes just two out of the 29 cases listed for the day. Commenting on the time management of the judiciary it also alleges that the 'judges actual "loaf" around, both physically and mentally.' Of course the report does not spare the police and the lawyers also who also contribute their share in causing inordinate delay in disposal of cases.

Looking at the menace of arrears at an all India level which has already crossed 25 million mark, it can be expected that the conclusions of the study in the remaining states - namely Karanataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Bengal - would not be qualitatively different.

The only silver lining to the otherwise grim scenario is the growing realisation that there is a gap between precepts and practice. It is not for nothing that the then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Mr Bharucha had officially lamented that at least 20 % judged of the higher judiciary are corrupt.

By Subhash Gatade

18 October, 2007
Countercurrents.org

Contempt of Court & Supreme Injustice

Following Justice B N Kirpal's order in October 2002 t o Government of India to undertake Networking of Rivers project assuming consensus among Indian states,Justice Y.K.Sabharwal pursued the case despite unanimous rejection of the project by Kerela Assembly that clearly showed that the assumption was misplaced.

Justice Sabharwal directions set in motion the process of sealing of properties in designated residential areas of Delhi which were being used for commercial purposes. This sealing went on relentlessly under the continuous supervision of Chief Justice Sabharwal’s bench, monitored and directed by a Court appointed monitoring committee. When the government came up with a new master plan of Delhi 2021 which allowed mixed use and commercial activity in many of the areas which were designated as residential, Justice Sabharwal orders on the sealing continued.

Some of the facts which were not publicly known was that his two sons, Chetan and Nitin had entered into partnerships with big Mall and Commercial complex developers and had become big Commercial complex developers themselves during that time. It was clear that these orders were giving direct benefit to his sons’ business. His orders are against the principles of natural justice, which say that no judge can hear a case in which he is personally interested. There was a serious conflict of interest in this case which renders his orders a nullity. It is in fact arguable that his dealing with this case in such circumstances involves an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

At the same time, it was also found that several plots were allotted to the Companies or relatives of Justice Sabharwal and which needs to be investigated to see if undue favour was shown to them and if so whether there was any quid pro quo in terms of judicial orders.

The facts thrown up in this case have very disturbing implications about the integrity of our judiciary in the highest places.

When MIDDAY newspaper reported the matter in May and June 2007 about Pawan Impex, the company of owned by sons of Justice Sabharwal which saw amazing rise in its fortune during the last two years. The reporters who reported it and their editor have been sentenced by the court.

Here is what the reporters submitted to the court and argued that truth is defence in the case of Contempt:

The story in question carried by Mid-Day newspaper on the 18th of May 2007, was a follow up of an earlier story carried by the same newspaper on 2 May 2007. In the issue of 2 May 2007, we had carried a story titled “Injustice” which essentially said that the former Chief Justice of India Justice Y.K. Sabharwal’s sons owned three commercial companies, Pawan Impex, Sug Exports, and Sabs Exports whose registered offices were at the Punjabi Bagh residence of Justice Sabharwal, at the time when he was ordering the sealing of commercial premises running from residential areas.

Further investigation into the matter by the reporters of Mid-Day led to the discovery of some further startling facts. It was discovered that these companies had shifted their registered office to the official residence of Justice Sabharwal at 6, Moti Lal Nehru Place for about 10 months during 2004 while Justice Sabharwal was a judge of the Supreme Court of India.

Further investigation into the matter also revealed that on October 23, 2004, one Kabul Chawla, who happens to be the promoter and owner of Business Park Town Planners (BPTP), a real estate development company which had promoted and developed a large number of shopping malls and commercial complexes in the city of Delhi, became a director in one of the companies promoted by Justice Sabharwal's sons called Pawan Impex Pvt. Ltd. At the same time, the registered office of this company was shifted back from the official residence of Justice Sabharwal, to his personal residence at Punjabi Bagh. Soon thereafter on February 12, 2005, the wife of Kabul Chawla, Anjali Chawla was also inducted as a director of this company.

Soon after the Chawlas were inducted as directors, in June 2006, both Kabul Chawla and his wife Anjali Chawla acquired 750,000 shares each in Pawan Impex Pvt Ltd. At this time the Share capital of Pawan Impex was increased from Rs. 1 Lakh to Rs. 3 Crores. Thus, as on 31st of September 2006, the shareholding in Pawan Impex Pvt. Ltd. was equally divided between the two sons of Justice Sabharwal and Kabul Chawla and his wife Anjali. Each of them owned 750,000 shares each in this company promoted by Justice Sabharwal's sons. Thus the Chawlas, who are one of the main promoters of shopping malls in Delhi, became equal partners in the Company of Justice Sabharwal’s sons.

The documents also showed that soon after the share capital of Pawan Impex was increased from Rs. 1 Lakh to Rs. 3 Crores (after the induction of the Chawlas and their investment in the company), the company took a loan of Rs. 28 Crores from the Union Bank of India at F14/15 Connaught Place (who happens to be a tenant of BPTP of the Chawlas).

The documentary evidence attesting to the above facts discovered on investigation by the reporters of Midday was obtained from the official website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs of the Government of India. This website contains the documents which have been filed by Pawan Impex Pvt. Ltd. regarding the shareholding, the directors, and the changes in the registered address of these companies. Copies of these documents attesting to the above facts as obtained by Mid-Day from the official website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs of the Government of India have been annexed with the Affidavit of Mrs. Vitusha Oberoi, Editor of Mid-Day Delhi and the Deponent craves liberty to refer to an rely upon the said annexures.

The story of Mid-Day in question is based on the above documents and legitimate inferences which can be made from these documents. There had earlier been a number of reports and allegations that the Shopping Mall developers stood to gain enormously from the sealing of shops and commercial establishments functioning from residential areas which took place on Justice Sabharwal’s orders. As responsible journalists we thought it to be our public duty to bring the above facts to the knowledge of the people, which appeared to show judicial impropriety at the highest level. We also spoke to some senior lawyers of the country who almost unanimously opined that if the above facts were true, the matter needed further investigation in public interest. Their comments as given to us were also carried by us in Mid-Day.

There have been a number of reports about Corruption in the Judiciary and the country has been exercised on the issue of judicial accountability. There have also been other reports about improper allotments of Plots in Noida to Justice Sabharwal’s daughter in law which were also reported widely in the media. These reports were based on statements made by a Cabinet Minister and Senior advocate of the Supreme Court. It was in these circumstances, that we felt that it was our public duty to bring the above facts to the knowledge of the people of this country. There was no malicious intention on our part to bring down the reputation of the judiciary. However, the facts discovered by us presented a disturbing picture of judicial impropriety in a particular case which we felt, needed to be brought to the attention of the people since it involves matter of enormous public interest.

In such a scenario, is it contempt of court if someone said, all such orders including in the case of Networking of Rivers are suspect.


"Joshua B. Good" wrote:

Four journalists of the New Delhi Mid-Day newspaper were sentenced to
four months in jail for exposing alleged corrupt land deals by former
India Supreme Court Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal. Arundhati Roy came
out supporting the journalists. Roy also was held in contempt of court
over her criticism of the Narmada dam ruling by the India Supreme Court.
To read the full story go to:
http://www.bannedmagazine.com/IndiaCourt.09222007.htm

Contempt of court is a court ruling which, in the context of a court trial or hearing, deems an individual as holding contempt for the court, its process, and its invested powers. Often stated simply as "in contempt," or a person "held in contempt," it is the highest remedy of a judge to impose sanctions on an individual for acts which excessively or in a wanton manner disrupt the normal process of a court hearing.

A finding of contempt of court may result from a failure to obey a lawful order of a court, showing disrespect for the judge, disruption of the proceedings through poor behavior, or publication of material deemed likely to jeopardize a fair trial. A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine or jail for someone found guilty of contempt of court. Typically judges in common law systems have more extensive power to declare someone in contempt than judges in civil law systems.

In civil cases involving relations between private citizens, the intended victim of the act of contempt is usually the party for whose benefit the ruling was implemented, rather than the court itself.

A person found in contempt of court is called a "contemnor." To prove contempt, the prosecutor or complainant must prove the four elements of contempt. These are (1) existence of a lawful order, (2) the contemnor's knowledge of the order, (3) the contemnor's ability to comply, and (4) the contemnor's failure to comply.

Bare act

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

Introduction

The origin of the law of contempt in India can be traced to the English law. In England, superior courts of record have from the earliest times exercised the power to commit for contempt those who scandalised the court or the judges. The right of the Indian high courts to punish for contempt was, in the first instance, recognised by the judicial committee of the Privy Council which observed that the offence of the contempt of court and the powers of the high courts to punish it are the same in such courts as in the Supreme Court in England.

Almost all the high courts in India, apart from the chartered high courts have exercised the jurisdiction inherent in a court of record from the very nature of the court itself. It has been judicially accepted throughout India that the jurisdiction was a special one, inherent in the very nature of the court. The first Indian statute on the Law of Contempt, i.e., the Contempt of Courts Act was passed in 1926.

It was enacted to define and limit the powers of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts. When the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 (XII of 1926) was in existence in British India, various Indian states also had their corresponding enactment. These states were Hyderabad, Madhya Bharat, Mysore, Pepsu, Rajastha, Travancore-Cochin and Saurashtra. State enactments of the Indian states and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 were replaced by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 (32 of 1952).

An attempt was made in April 1960 to introduce in the Lok Sabha a bill to consolidate and amend the law relating to contempt of courts. On an examination of the bill, the government appears to have felt that the law relating to contempt of courts was uncertain, undefined and unsatisfactory and that in the light of the constitutional changes which have taken place in the country, it would be advisable to have the entire law on the subject scrutinised by a special committee set up for the purpose.

In pursuance of that decision, a committee was set up on July 29, 1961 and it submitted its report on February 28, 1963 to define and limit the powers of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto. The Joint Select Committee of Parliament on Contempt of Courts examined the issue in detail and a new bill, the Contempt of Courts Bill, 1968 was prepared by the committee.
Statement of objects and reasons

It is generally felt that the existing law relating to contempt of courts is somewhat uncertain, undefined and unsatisfactory. The jurisdiction to punish for contempt touches upon two important fundamental rights of the citizens, namely, the right to personal liberty and the right to freedom of expression. It was, therefore, considered advisable to have the entire law on the subject scrutinised by a special committee.

In pursuance of this, a committee was set up in 1961 under the chairmanship of the late H N Sanyal, the then additional solicitor general. The committee made a comprehensive examination of the law and problems relating to contempt of court in the light of the position obtaining in our own country and various foreign countries. The recommendations which the committee made took note of the importance given to freedom of speech in the Constitution and of the need for safeguarding the status and dignity of courts and interests of administration of justice.

The recommendations of the committee have been generally accepted by the government after considering the view expressed on those recommendations by the state governments, union territory administrations, the Supreme Court, the high courts and the judicial commissioners. The bill seeks to give effect to the accepted recommendations of the Sanyal Committee.

Act 70 of 1971

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971) was passed by the Parliament in December 1971 and it came into force w.e.f. December 24, 1971.

List of amending act
The Contempt of Courts (Amendment) Act, 1976 (45 of 1976)
Preamble (December 24, 1971)
An Act to define and limit the powers of certain courts in punishing contempt of courts and to regulate their procedure in relation thereto
1. Short title and extent
(1) This Act may be called the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
(2) It extends to the whole of India.
Provided that it shall not apply to the state of Jammu and Kashmir except to the extent to which the provisions of this Act relate to contempt of the Supreme Court.
Comments
(i) The law of contempt of courts is for keeping the administration of justice pure and undefiled. While the dignity of the court is to be maintained at all costs, the contempt jurisdiction, which is of a special nature, should be sparingly used; Shakuntala Sahadevram Tewari v. Hemchand M.Singhania, (1990) 3 Bom CR 82 (Bom).

(ii) Proceedings of contempt are summary in nature and also are sui generis; Golcha Advertising Agency vs The State of Maharashtra, (1990) 2 Bom CR 262 (Bom).

2. Definitions

In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:
(a) 'Contempt of court' means civil contempt or criminal contempt.
(b) 'Civil contempt' means willful disobedience to any judgement, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or willful breach of an undertaking given to a court.
(c) 'Criminal contempt' means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, 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.
(a) 'High Court' means the high court for a state or a union territory and includes the court of the judicial commissioner in any union territory.

Comments
(i) There are three different sorts of contempt, viz., scandalising the court, abusing parties who are concerned in causes here and prejudicing mankind against persons before the case is heard; In re: St. James Evening Post, (1974) 2 ATK 469
(ii) Courts seek to punish acts or conduct calculated to interfere with the administration of justice; In re: P C Sen, AIR 1970 SC 1821.
(iii) Comment on pending case or abuse of a party may amount to contempt when the case is tried by a judge: Subhash Chand v S M Aggarwal, 1984 Crl LJ 481 (De.).
(iv) Judges by reason of their office are precluded from entering into any controversy in columns of the public press; The State v.Vikar Ahmed, AIR 1954 Hyd 175.
(v) There is no special principle attached to the press to comment, criticise or investigate the facts of any case of the prejudice of the trial of the case; Sukhdev Singh v Teja Singh, AIR 1954 SC 186.
(vi) No editor has a right to assume the role of investigator to try to prejudice the court against any person; The District Magistrate v M A Hamid Ali Gardish, AIR 1940 Oudh 137.
(vii) It is time to stem institutionalised procrastination, K V Venkatesh v. taluka executive magistrate, AIR 1990 Kant 86.
(viii) The law relating to contempt of court is well settled. Any act done or writing published which is calculated to bring a court or a judge into contempt, or to lower his authority, or to interfere with the due course of justice or the lawful process of the court, is a contempt of court; Q.R. v. Gray, 1900 (2) QBD 36 (40)
(ix) Contempt by speech or writing may be by scandalising the court itself, or by abusing parties to actions, or by prejudicing mankind in favour of or against a party before the cause is heard. It is incumbent upon courts of justice to preserve their proceedings from being misrepresented, for prejudicing the mind of the people against persons concerned as parties in causes before the cause is finally heard has pernicious consequences. Speech or writings misrepresenting the proceedings of the court or prejudicing the public for or against a party or involving reflections on parties to a proceeding amount to contempt. To make a speech tending to influence the result of a pending trial, whether civil or criminal is a grave contempt. Comments on pending proceedings, if emanating from the parties or their lawyers, are generally a more serious contempt than those coming from independent sources; State of Haryana v Ch Bhajanlal, AIR 1993 SC 1348.
(x) In contempt proceedings there are essentially two parties -- the court and contemporary; Shakuntala Sahadevram Tiwari v. Hemachand M Singhania, (1990) 3 Bom CR 82 (Bom).
(xi) The law of contempt must be strictly interpreted and complied with before any person can be committed for contempt; Roshan S Boyce v B R Cotton Mills Ltd., AIR 1990 SC 1881.
(xii) Any willful disobedience to the orders of the court to do or abstain from doing any act or breach of any undertaking given to the court is prima-facie civil contempt; Vidya Sagar v IIIrd additional di.strict judge, Dehradun, 1991 All CJ 586 (588); See also State of Assam v. V K Vishnoi, 1993 (23) ATC 581 (587-588); State of Orissa v. Bijaya Mohanty, (1993) 75 CLT 820 (830).
(xiii) Non caring of the warrant issued by the criminal court amounts to criminal contempt; E Venkaiah v. government of Andhra Pradesh, 1992 (3) ALT 193 (199).
Back to top
3. Innocent publication and distribution of matter not contempt
(1) A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court on the ground that he has published (whether by words, spoken or written, or by visible representations, or otherwise) any matter which interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the course of justice in connection with any civil or criminal proceeding pending at that time of publication, if at that time he had no reasonable grounds for believing that the proceeding was pending.

(2) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, the publication of any such matter as is mentioned in sub section (1) in connection with any civil or criminal proceeding which is not pending at the time of publication shall not be deemed to constitute contempt of court.

(3) A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court on the ground that he has distributed a publication containing any such matter as is mentioned in sub section (1), if at the time of distribution he had no reasonable grounds for believing that it contained or was likely to contain any such matter as aforesaid.

Provided that this sub section shall not apply in respect of the distribution of:
(i) Any publication which is a book or paper printed or published otherwise than in conformity with the rules contained in section 3 of the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867 (25 of 1867).
(ii) Any publication which is a newspaper published otherwise than in conformity with the rules contained in section 5 of the said Act.

Explanation

For the purposes of this section, a judicial proceeding --
(a) is said to be pending,
(b) in the case of a civil proceeding, when it is instituted by the filing of a plaint or otherwise,
(c) in the case of a criminal proceeding under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 [5 of 1898 (Note: now see Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)], or any other law -
(i) where it relates to the commission of the offence, when the chargesheet or challan is filed, or when the court issues summons or warrant, as the case may be, against the accused, and
(ii) in any other case, when the court takes cognisance of the matter to which the proceeding relates, and
(iii) in the case of a civil or criminal proceeding, shall be deemed to continue to be pending until it is heard and finally decided, that is to say, in a case where an appeal or revision is competent, until the appeal or revision is heard and finally decided or, where no appeal or revision in preferred, until the period of limitation prescribed for such appeal or revision has expired,
(iv) Which has been heard and finally decided shall not be deemed to be pending merely by reason of the fact that proceedings for the execution of the decree, order or sentence passed therein are pending.

Comments
(i) The liberty of free expression is not to be compounded with a licence to make unfounded allegations of corruption against judiciary; M R Prashar v Dr Farooq Abdullah, (1984) 1 Cr LC 433.
(ii) The abuse of the liberty of free speech and expression carries the case nearer the law of contempt; M R Prashar v Dr Farooq Abdullah, (1984) 1 Cr. LC 433.
(iii) A defence of truth or justification is not available to the publisher of a newspaper in proceedings for contempt of court; managing director Vamin v O P Bensal, 1982 Cr. LJ 322 (Raj).
(iv) Publication of reports of proceedings before a court of law must be true, accurate and without malice; Wasuddeoraoji v A D Mani, AIR 1951 Nag. 26.
4. Fair and accurate report of judicial proceeding not contempt

Subject to the provisions contained in section 7, a person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding or any state thereof.

Comments
(i) The words 'judicial proceeding' means day-to-day proceedings of the court. The media reports must represent a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding and not be a one-sided picture; Subhash Chand v S M Aggarwal, 1984 Cr LJ 481
(ii) While reproducing the court proceedings, no words may be added, omitted or substituted; E T Sen v E Narayanan, AIR 1969 Del 201.
(iii) Fair and accurate reporting of the judgment is essential for the healthy administration of justice. In re: Progressive Port and Dock Workers Union, 1984 Cr LJ 1061 (Ker).
5. Fair criticism of judicial act not contempt - A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing any fair comment on the merits of any case which has been heard and finally decided.

Comments
(i) The nature and circumstances under which allegations are made, the extent and the character of the publications and similar other considerations have to be taken into account in order to determine whether the act complained of amounts to contempt. No action is called for, if the criticism is reasonable and is offered for the public good; In re: Guljari Lal, 1968 MPLJ 725 (730-731).
(ii) Judgments are open to criticism that must be done without casting aspersions on the judges and the judges and the courts and without adverse comments amounting to scandalising the courts; advocate general v Abraham George, 1976 Cr. LJ 158 (161).
(iii) A fair comment on the judgment of a court could not constitute a contempt; state of Maharashtra v Chandrakant Tripathi, AIR 1936 PC 141.
(iv) The publication in newspaper of reports of proceedings before a court of law must be true; state v Bhavani Prasad, AIR 1954 Nag 36.
(v) The criticism of a judge must take the form of reasonable argument or exploitation; must be made in good faith and free from the imputation of improper motives; state of Uttar Pradesh v Brahma Prakash, AIR 1950 All 556.

6. Complaint against presiding officers of subordinate courts when not contempt
A person shall not be guilty of contempt of court in respect of any statement made by him in good faith concerning the presiding officer or any subordinate court to -
(a) Any other subordinate court, or
(b) The high court to which it is subordinate.
Explanation - In this section, 'subordinate court' means any court subordinate to a high court.

Comments
(i) A complaint or report about a judicial officer of his dishonesty, partiality or other conduct unbecoming of a court, made to an authority to whom it is subordinate, is not contempt of court if all reasonable care is taken by the makers to keep it confidential; In re: Guljair Lal, 1968 MPLJ 725 (MP).
(ii) Immunity is provided to a citizen making a complaint to the high court against a presiding officer of a subordinate court so long as the complaint is made in good faith; In re: court on its own motion, 1973 Cr LJ 1106 (P & H).
7. Publication of information relating to proceeding in chambers or in camera not contempt except in certain cases -
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, a person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing a fair and accurate report of judicial proceedings before any court sitting in chambers or in camera except in the following cases, that is to say -
(a) Where the publication is contrary to the provisions of any enactment for the time being in force.
(b) Where the court, on grounds of public policy or in exercise of any power vested in it, expressly prohibits the publication of all information relating to the proceeding or of information of the description which is published.
(c) Where the court sits in chambers or in camera for reason connected with public order or the security of the state, the publication of information relating to those proceedings,
(d) Where the information relates to secret process, discovery or invention which is an issue in the proceedings.
(2) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in sub section (1) a person shall not be guilty of contempt of court for publishing the text or a fair and accurate summary of the whole, or any part, of an order made by a court sitting in chambers or in camera, unless the court has expressly prohibited the publication thereof on grounds of public policy, or for reasons connected with public order or the security of the state, or on the ground that it contains information relating to secret process, discovery or invention, or in exercise of any power vested on it.
8. Other defences not affected - Nothing contained in this Act shall be construed as implying that any other defence which would have been a valid defence in any proceedings for contempt of court has ceased to be available merely by reason of the provisions of this Act.

Comments
Since a proceeding in contempt is a quasi-judicial proceeding, the precise nature of contempt must be set out in the motion: Nazamunnissa Shaukat Ali v Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, (1990) 1 Mah LR 329 (Bom).
9. Act not to imply enlargement of scope of contempt - Nothing contained in this Act shall be construed as implying that any disobedience, breach, publication or other act is punishable as contempt of court which not be so punishable apart from this Act.

Comments
The scope of contempt of courts has not been enlarged. What was not contempt so far is not contempt of court even now. The contempt of court should not be resorted to only for the purpose of enforcing interpretive rights; state of West Bengal v N N Bagchi, AIR 1966 SC 447.
10. Power of high court to punish contempts of subordinate courts - Every high court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, powers and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice, in respect of contempts of courts subordinate to it and it has and exercise in respect of contempts of itself.
Provided that no high court shall take cognisance of a contempt alleged to have been committed in respect of a court subordinate to it where such contempt is an offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).

Comments
(i) The phrase 'courts subordinate to it' used in section 10 is wide enough to include all courts which are judicially subordinate to the high court even though administrative control over them under Article 235 of the constitution does not vest in the high court; S K Sarkar, member, board of revenue, U P Lucknow v Vinay Chandra Mishra, 1981 Cr LJ 283 (286).
(ii) The power of committal for contempt must be wielded with the greatest reluctance and the greatest anxiety and only with the object of seeing that the dignity and authority of the court are not imposed; E Chandra v member secretary, MMDA., (1990) 1 MLJR 537.
(iii) If the act is punishable by the Penal Code as contempt of court then that act cannot form the subject of contempt proceedings by the high court; the emperor V J P Swadhin, Air 1938 All 358.
(iv) The high court cannot take cognisance of 'contempt' which is punishable under the Indian Penal Code; N K Gupta v Umraomal Agarwalla, AIR 1951 Cal 489.
11. Power of high court to try offences committed or offenders found outside jurisdiction - A high court shall have jurisdiction to inquire into or try a contempt of itself or of any court subordinate to it, whether the contempt is alleged to have been committed within or outside the local limits of its jurisdiction, and whether the person alleged to be guilty of contempt is within or outside such limits.

Comments
(i) This section provided for the extra-territorial jurisdiction of high courts of commit a person for contempt even though the act alleged was committed outside its territorial jurisdiction; state v V Adilakshmi Amma, 1954 Cr. LJ 988 (Ori).
(ii) This section expands the ambit of the authority beyond with was till then considered to be possible but it does not confer a new jurisdiction. It merely widens the scope of our existing jurisdiction of a very special kind; Sukhdev Singh v Teja Singh, AIR 1954 SC 186 (190); state of Uttar Pradesh v Radhey Shyam.

12. Punishment for contempt of court - (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act or in any other law, a contempt of court may be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both.Provided that the accused may be discharged or the punishment awarded may be remitted on apology being made to the satisfaction of the court.
Explanation -
An apology shall not be rejected merely on the ground that it is qualified or conditional if the accused makes it bona fide.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, no court shall impose a sentence in excess of that specified in sub section for any contempt either in respect of itself or of a court subordinate to it.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, where a person is found guilty of a civil contempt, the court, if it considers that a fine will not meet the ends of justice and that a sentence of imprisonment is necessary shall, instead of sentencing him to simple imprisonment, direct that the he be detained in a civil prison for such period not exceeding six months as it may think fit.
(4) Where the person found guilty of contempt of court in respect of any undertaking given to a court is a company, every person who, at the time the contempt was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the contempt and the punishment may be enforced, with the leave of the court, by the detention in civil prison of each such person.

Provided that nothing contained in this sub section shall render any such person liable to such punishment if he proves that the contempt was committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent its commission.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub section (4) where the contempt of court referred to therein has been committed by a company and it is provided that the contempt has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manger, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of the be contempt and the punishment may be enforced, with the leave of the court, by the detention in civil prison of such director, manager, secretary or other officer.
Explanation - For the purpose of sub sections (4) and (5) -
(a) 'Company' means any body corporate and includes a firm or other association of individuals, and
(b) 'Director' in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm.

Comments
Breach of an injunction, or breach of an undertaking given to a court by a person in a civil proceeding amounts to contempt; Noorali Babul Thanewala v K M M Shetty, AIR 1990 Sc 564.
(i) Committing the contemner to prison is always discretionary with the court; Shakuntala Sahadevram Tiwari v Hemchand M Singhania, (1990) 3 Bom CR 82 (Bom).
(ii) The power to fine and imprison for contempt is a necessary incident and attribute of a court; Watson v Williams, (33) 36 Mis 341.
(iii) An unreserved apology, in less serious cases, has the asset of taking the stringent of contempt; court on behalf of the state of Punjab v Raddha Krishan Khanna, AIR 1961 Punj 113.
(iv) The contempt power should be kept sheathed; union of India v S C Sharma, (1980) 2 SCC 144.
(v) Apology is an act of contrition. Apology must not be shorn of penitence. Tendering of apology cannot be a panacea in every case of contempt. No apology could undo gross contempt and serious cases of contempt; state of Orissa v R N Patra, (1975) 41 Cut LT 329.
(vi) The court can, even when accepts the apology, commit an offender to prison or otherwise punish him; Rupert J Bamabas v N Bharani, 1990 LW (Crl) 27 (Mad).
(vii) A haulting, hesitating and vacillating apology deserves to be rejected; state of Uttar Pradesh v Krishna Madho, AIR 1952 All 86.
(viii) The court may or may not accept an apology goes to sentence and cannot, therefore, be accepted without a finding that contempt has been committed. However, apology, though not a weapon of defence forged always to purge the guilty, should be tendered out the earliest possible stage, unreservedly and unconditionally and it must be indicative of remorse and contrition as well as free, full, frank and manly confession of a wrong done; In re: Hirenn Bose, AIR 1969 Cal 1.
13. Contempts not punishable in certain cases - Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, no court shall impose a sentence under this Act for a contempt of court unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends substantially to interfere with the due course of justice.

Comments
(i) Every infraction of the court's order does not amount to contempt of court; H S Butalia v Subhas Saksena, 1974 Cr LJ 828 (Cal).
(ii) Technical contempts are to be ignored; Baradakanta Mishra v the registrar, Orissa high court, AIR 1974 SC 710.
(iii) A party (or person) can be committed for contempt only owing to any willful or deliberate or reckless disobedience of the order of the court; Jiwani Kumari v Satyabrata Chakraborty, AIR 1991 SC 326.
(iv) Exemplary costs may be awarded instead of imposing a fine; Naamunnissa Shaukat Ali v Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay, (1990) Mah LR 329 (Bom).
14. Procedure where contempt is in the face of the Supreme Court or a high court - (1) When it is alleged, or appears to the Supreme Court or the high court upon its own view, that a person has been guilty of contempt committed in its presence or hearing, the court may cause such person to be detained in custody, and, at any time before the rising of the court, on the same day, or as early as possible thereafter, shall -

(a) Cause him to be informed in writing of the contempt with which he is charged.
(b) Afford him an opportunity to make his defence to the charge,
(c) After taking such evidence as may be necessary or as may be offered by such person and after hearing him, proceed, either forthwith or after adjournment, to determine the matter of the charge, and
(d) Make such order for the punishment or discharge of such person as may be just.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub section (1) where a person charged with contempt under the sub section applies, whether orally or in writing, to have the charge against him tried by some judge other than the judge or judges in whose presence or hearing the offence is alleged to have been committed, and the court is of opinion that it is practicable to do so and that in that interest of proper administration of justice the application should be allowed, it shall cause the matter to be placed, together with a statement of the facts of the case, before the chief justice for such directions as he may think fit to issue as respects the trial thereof.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, in any trial of a person charged with contempt under sub section (1) which is held, in pursuance of a direction given under sub section (2), by a judge other than the judge or judges in whose presence or hearing the offence is alleged to have been committed, it shall not be necessary for the judge or judges in whose presence or hearing the offence is alleged to have been committed to appear as a witness and the statement placed before the chief justice under sub section (2) shall be treated as evidence in the case.
(4) Pending the determination of the charge, the court may direct that a person charged with contempt under this section shall be detained in such custody as it may specify.

Provided that he shall be released on bail, of a bond for such sum of money as the court thinks sufficient is executed with or without sureties conditioned that the person charged shall attend at the time and place mentioned in the bond and shall continue to so attend until otherwise directed by the court.
Provided further that the court may, if it thinks fit, instead of taking bail from such person, discharge him on his executing a bond without sureties for his attendance as aforesaid.

Comments
(i) Where contempt -
(a) It committed in the presence or hearing of the Supreme Court or the high court, or
(b) Is not committed in the presence or hearing of the Supreme Court or the high court, but a complaint is made immediately before the alleged contemner leaves the precincts of that court, then the procedure laid down in this section has to be adopted.
(ii) If the court did not take action under section 14 then the procedure of section 15 cannot be adopted later; Mansiha Mukherjee v Aashoke Chatterjee, 1985 Cr LJ 1224.

15. Cognisance of criminal contempt in other cases - (1) In the case of a criminal contempt, other than a contempt referred to in section 14, the Supreme Court or the high court may take action on its own motion or on a motion made by -
(a) The advocate-general, or
(b) Any other person, with the consent in writing of the advocate-general, (Note:- Ins. by Act 45 of 1976, sec.2)
(c) [(Note:- Ins. by Act 45 of 1976, sec.2)] In relation to the high court for the union territory of Delhi, such law officer as the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, specify in this behalf, or any other persons, with the consent in writing of such law officer.
(2) In the case of any criminal contempt of a subordinate court, the high court may take action on a reference made to it by the subordinate court or on a motion made by the advocate-general or, in relation to a union territory, by such law officer as the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, specify in this behalf.
(3) Every motion or reference made under this section shall specify the contempt of which the person charge is alleged to be guilty.
Explanation - In this section, the expression 'advocate-general' means -
(a) In relation to the Supreme Court, the attorney or the solicitor-general
(b) In relation to the high court, the advocate-general of the state or any of the states for which the high court has been established.
(c) In relation to the court of a judicial commissioner, such law officer as the central government may, by notification in the official gazette, specify in this behalf.

Comments
(i) The court can take action -
(a) On motion by the advocate-general himself; or
(b) On motion by anyone with the consent of the advocate-general; or
(c) On report by a subordinate court, in cases not covered by section 14 of the Act.
(ii) Procedure of making a reference cannot apply in a case when the presiding officer of a subordinate court himself is guilty of contempt of court; Berely v Xavier, 1988 Cr LJ 90.
(iii) It is always open the high court to take action suo motu in respect of a subordinate court; state of Orissa v R N Patra, 1976 Cr LJ 440 (Ori); see also A R Rao, 1981 Cr LJ 1322.
(iv) Absolute discretion is rested in the advocate-general in the matter of according consent; N Venkataramanappa v D K Naikar, AIR 1975 Kant 57.
(v) Nobody has a right to compel the subordinate court to make a reference to the high court; Jomon v the state of Kerala, (1987) IJ Reports 273 (Kerala).
(vi) A negative fact cannot be proved; V K Kanade v Mandho Godkari, (1990) I Mah LR 544 (Bom).
(vii) Contemner has no right to produce defence to establish the truth of his allegations; In re: K L Gauba, AIR 1942 Lah 105; see also In re: Ram Mohanlal, AIR 1935 All 38.
16. Contempt by judge, magistrate or other person acting judicially - (1) Subject to the provisions of any law for the time being in force, a judge, magistrate or other persons act in judicially shall also be liable for contempt of his own court or of any other court in the same manner as any other individual is liable and the provisions of this Act, so far as may be, apply accordingly.
(2) Notwithstanding in this section shall apply to any observations or remarks made by a judge, magistrate or other person act in judicially, regarding a subordinate court in an appeal or revision pending before such judge, magistrate or other person against the order or judgement of the subordinate court.

Comments
(i) Only a judge of a subordinate court can be said to have committed contempt of his own court i.e. the court in which such judge is presiding; Harish Chandra v S Ali Ahmed, 1987 Cr LJ 320 (Pat).
(ii) A judge can foul judicial administration by misdemeanors while engaged in the exercise of the functions of a judge; Baradakanta v the registrar, Orissa high court, AIR 1974 SC 710.
(iii) The magistrates should be conscious of their heavy responsibilities and should not act in a manner prejudicial to the litigants; B N Choudhary v S M Singh, 1967 Cr LJ 1141 (Pat).
(iv) When the president officer of a subordinate court is guilty of contempt of court, procedure of making a reference cannot apply under section 15 of the Act; Berely v Xavier, 1988 Cr LJ 90.
17. Procedure after cognisance - (1) Notice of every proceeding under section 15 shall be served personally on the person charged, unless the court for reasons to be recorded directs otherwise.
(2) The notice shall be accompanied -

(a) In the case of proceedings commenced on a motion, by a copy of the motion as also copies of the affidavits, if any, on which such motion is founded and,
(b) In case of proceedings commenced on a reference by a subordinate court, by a copy of the reference.
(3) The court may, if it is satisfied that a person charged under Section 15 is likely to abscond or keep out of the way to avoid service of the notice, order the attachment of his property of such value or amount as it may deem reasonable.
(4) Every attachment under sub section (3) shall be effected in the manner provided in the code of civil procedure, 1908 [5 of 1908 (Note: now see code of criminal procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)], for the attachment of property in execution of a decree for payment of money, and if, after such attachment, the person charged appears and shows to the satisfaction of the court that he did not abscond or keep out of the way to avoid service of the notice, the court shall order the release of his property from attachment upon such terms as to costs or otherwise as it may think fit.
(5) Any person charged with contempt under Section 15 may file an affidavit in support of this defence, and the court may determine the matter of the charge either on the affidavits filed or after taking such further evidence as may be necessary, and pass such order as the justice of the case requires.

Comments
(i) The period of one year has to be reckoned from the date on which a notice under this section has been issued; K K R Nair v Mohan Das, 1990 Cr LJ 1641 (AP).
(ii) An order initiating proceeding for contempt by a notice issued under section 17 is not appealable under section 19 of the Act; the union of India v Mario Coural Sa. AIR 1982 SC 691.
(iii) Committal for contempt is always discretionary with the court; S C Nandy v G M Bhattacharjee, AIR 1951 Cal 507.
(iv) The position of a contemner is that of an accused person; M R Parashar v Dr Farooq Abdullah 1984 Cal LJ 337 (SC).
(v) Contempt proceedings are quasi criminal in nature; Sheoraj v A P Batra, AIR 1955 All 638.
(vi) Benefit of doubt is available to an accused; state of Orissa v Nityanandda Mohopatra, AIR 1960 Ori 132.
(vii) Personal appearance, unless dispensed with, of a contemner is mandatory; B N Jaisimha v N T Prabhakar, (1985) 29 MLJC Crl 640.
Back to top
18. Hearing of cases of criminal contempt to be by benches - (1) Every case of criminal contempt under section 15 shall be heard and determined by a bench of not less than two judges.
(2) Sub section (1) shall not apply to the court of a judicial commissioner.

Comments
(i) The jurisdiction rests exclusively with a bench of not less than two judges of the high court; B R Karandikar v M Y Joshy, (1983) 2 Bom Cr 558 (Bom).
(ii) However, it was observed that a single judge can also deal with criminal contempts committed in facie curium; In re: court on its own motion, AIR 1980 P & H 72.
19. Appeals - (1) An appeal shall lie as of right from any order to decision of high court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt -
(a) Where the order or decision is that of a single judge, to a bench of not less than two judges of the court.
(b) 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.
2) Pending any appeal. The appellate court may order that -
(a) The execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended
(b) If the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail, and
(c) The appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt.
(3) Where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfied 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).
(4) An appeal under sub section (1) shall be filed-
(a) In the case of an appeal to a bench of the high court, within 30 days.
(b) In the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within 60 days, from the date of the order appealed against.

Comments
(a) When thee high court acquits the contemner, no appeal lies; Subhash Chandra v B R Kakkar, (1992) 2 Punj Lr 46 (P & H).
(ii) If the order of committal for contempt of court is made -
(b) By a single judge of the high court, an appeal lies to a division bench thereof; or
(c) By a division bench of the high court, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court, as of a statutory right; Mohammad Idris v R J Babuji, (1984) 2 Crimes 880 (SC).
(iii) It is not each and every order passed during the contempt proceedings that is appealable; S P Wahi v Surendra Singh, 1983 Cr LJ 1426.
(iv) An appeal does not automatically operate as a stay of the order appealed against; Hans Raj v state of Himachal Pradesh, 1985 Cr LJ 1030.
20. Limitation for actions for contempt - No court shall initiate any proceedings if contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed.

Comments
(i) Initiation of any proceedings for contempt is barred after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed; V M Kanade v Madhao Gadkari, (1990) 1 Mah LR 544 (Bom).
(ii) No intervening event or order stops the running of time specified in this section; Golcha Avertising Agency v the state of Maharashtra, (1990) 2 Bom CR 262 (Bom).
(iii) The expression 'court' denotes a high court or the Supreme Court; the state of Bihar v Ambika Roy, 1991 Cr LJ 82 (Pat).
(iv) The provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 do not apply; Krishnalal Chhoteylal, (1987) 13 ALR 44.
(v) Delay in initiating contempt proceedings cannot be condoned; T M A Abdul Hamed v S Radhakrishnan, 1989 LW (Crl) 237.
21. Act not to apply to nyaya panchayatas or other village courts - Nothing contained in this Act shall apply in relation to contempt of nyaya panchayats or other village courts, by whatever name known, for the administration of justice, established under any law.
22. Act to be in addition to, and not in derogation of, other laws relating to contempt - The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of the provision of any other law relating to contempt of courts.
Comments
The provisions incorporated in the Act are supplemented to already existing law of contempt; Harish Chandra Misra v S Ali Ahmed, AIR 1986 Pat 65.
23. Power of the Supreme Court and high court to make rules - The Supreme Court or, a case may be, any high court, may make rules, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, providing for any matter relating to its procedure.

Comments
The court is guided by its own procedure to be followed in the facts and circumstances of each individual case and to see that the condemner is getting full opportunity to make his defence; Mohammed Vamin v O P Bansal, 1982 Cr LJ 322 (Raj).
24. Repeal - The Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 (32 of 1952) is hereby repealed.

Comments
(i) This section repealed the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 (32 of 1952) with effect from 24-12-1991 which had already repealed the Contempt to Courts Act, 1926 (XII of 1926 w.e.f. 14-3-1952
(ii) For contempts committed prior to this Act, action could be taken under the Repealed Act (32 of 1952); see Ramniklal Nanalal v.Shah Pranlal Nahchand, AIR 1952 Kutch 74.
Rules to regulate proceedings for contempt to the Supreme Court, 1975 G.S.R. 142 - In exercise of the powers under section 23 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with article 145 of the Constitution of India and all other powers enabling it in this behalf, the Supreme Court hereby makes, with the approval of the President, the following rules -
1. (1) These rules may be called the rules to regulate proceedings for contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the official gazette (Note: published in the gazette of India, dated February 1, 1975 and came into force from that date.
2. (1) Where contempt is committed in view or presence or hearing of the court, the contemnor may be punished by the court before which it is committed either forthwith or on such date as may be appointed by the court in that behalf.
(2) Pending the determination of the charge, the court may direct that the contemnor shall be detained in such custody as it may specify.
Provided that the contemnor may be released on bail on such terms as the court may direct.
3. In case of contempt other than the contempt referred to in rule 2, the court may take action.
(a) Suo motu, or
(b) On a petition made by attorney general, or solicitor general, or
(c) On a petition made by any person, and in the case of a criminal contempt with the consent in writing of the attorney general or the solicitor general.
4. (a) Every petition under Rule 3 (b) or (c) shall contain:
(i) The name, description and place of residence of the petitioner or petitioners and of the persons charged.
(ii) Nature of the contempt alleged, and such material facts, including the date or dates of commission of the alleged contempt, as may be necessary for the proper determination of the case.
(iii) If a petition has previously been made by him on the same facts, the petitioners shall give the details of the petition previously made and shall also indicate the result thereof.
(b) The petition shall be supported by an affidavit.
(c) Whether the petitioner relies upon a document or documents in his possession or power, he shall file such document or documents or true copies thereof with the petition.
(d) No court-fee shall be payable on the petition, and on any documents filed in the proceedings.
5. Every petition under rule 3 (b) and (c) shall be posted before the court for preliminary hearing and for orders as to issue of notice. Upon such hearing, the court, if satisfied that no prima facie case has been made out for issue of notice, may dismiss the petition, and, if not so satisfied direct that notice of the petition be issued to the contemnor.
6. (1) Notice to the person charged shall be in Form 1. The person charged shall, unless otherwise ordered, appear in person before the court a directed on the date fixed for hearing of the proceeding, and shall continue to remain present during hearing till the proceeding is finally disposed of by order of the court
(2) When action is instituted on petition, a copy of the petition along with the annexure and affidavits shall be served upon the person charged.
7. The person charged may file his reply duly supported by an affidavit or affidavits.
8. No further affidavit or document shall be filed except with the leave of the court.
9. Unless otherwise ordered by the court, seven copies of the paper book shall be prepared in the registry, one for the petitioner, one for the opposite party and the remaining for the use of the court. The paper book in case shall be prepared at the expense of the central government and shall consist of the following documents:

(i) Petition and affidavits filed by the petitioner,
(ii) A copy of, or a statement relating to, the objectionable matter constituting the alleged contempt.
(iii) Replay and affidavits of the parties.
(iv) Documents filed by the parties.
(v) Any other document which the registrar may deem fit to include.

10. The court may direct the attorney-general or solicitor-general to appear and assist the court.
11. (1) The court may, if it has reason to believe, that the person charged is absconding or is otherwise evading service of notice, or if he fails to appear in person or to continue to remain present in person in pursuance of the notice, direct a warrant bailable or non-bailable for his arrest, addressed to one or more police officers or may order attachment of property. The warrant shall be issued under the signature of the registrar. The warrant shall be in Form II and shall be executed, as far as may be in the manner provided for execution of warrants under the code of criminal procedure.
(2) The warrant shall be execute by the officer to officers to whom it is directed, and may also be executed by any other police officer whose name is endorsed upon the warrant by the officer to whom it is directed or endorsed.
(3) Where a warrant is to be executed outside the union territory of Delhi, the court may instead of directing such warrant to police officer, forward it to the magistrate of the district or the superintendent of police or commissioner of police of the district within which the person charged is believed to be residing. The magistrate or the police officer to whom the warrant is forwarded shall endorse his name thereon, and cause it to be executed.
(4) Every person who is arrested and detained shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of 24 hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate, and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate.

12. The court may, either suo motu, or on motion made for that purpose, order the attendance for cross-examination, for a person whose affidavit has been filed in the matter.
13. The court may make orders for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person to be examined as a witness and for discovery of production of any document.
14. The court may pass such orders as it thinks fit including orders as to costs which may recovered as if the order were a decree of the court.
15. Save as otherwise provided by the rules contained herein, the provisions of the Supreme Court Rules, 1966 shall, so far as may be, apply to proceedings in relation to proceedings in contempt under this part.
16. Where a person charged with contempt is adjusted guilty and is sentenced to suffer imprisonment, a warrant of commitment a d detention shall be made out in Form IV under the signature of the registrar. Every such warrant shall remain in force until it is cancelled by order of the court on until it is executed. The superintendent of the jail shall in pursuance of the order receive the person so adjusted and detain him in custody for the period specified therein, or until further orders.