Legal provisions involved: Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 2(c), 12 and 19(1)(b)

Judgement by: Supreme Court of India

Bench/Judge: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta

Facts

A former office-bearer of a housing society issued a circular accusing a “dog mafia” of influencing High Court and Supreme Court judges. The Bombay High Court treated these remarks as criminal contempt and punished her with one week’s imprisonment and a fine. The woman admitted her mistake, apologised, and said she acted under pressure from residents. She then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Key legal provisions

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Sections 2(c), 12 and 19(1)(b)

Issues raised

Whether the circular amounted to contempt, and whether the High Court was right in giving a jail sentence despite her apology?

Arguments of the case

The High Court felt the circular was meant to insult and undermine the judiciary. The appellant argued that she had apologised from the beginning and deserved remission of the sentence.

Judgement

The Supreme Court agreed that the circular was contemptuous but held that her apology was genuine. It ruled that the High Court should have considered this and remitted the sentence. The court set aside the punishment but upheld the finding of contempt.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.