In a recent landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has articulated a significant precedent regarding contempt of court charges. The apex court clarified that a mere delay in adhering to a court order does not necessarily constitute contempt, unless there is clear evidence of deliberate or willful defiance.
The bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai, Sudhanshu Dhulia, and Sandeep Mehta delivered this crucial verdict, emphasizing the need for intent behind non-compliance. They stated, “We are of the view that mere delay in complying with the order, unless there is a deliberate or wilful act on the part of the alleged contemnors would not attract the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.”
This pronouncement arose from a case involving an IAS officer who faced contempt charges in a High Court due to a delay in complying with its directive. Despite the order eventually being followed, a fine of Rs. 500/- was imposed on the officer as a penalty.
The officer, however, contested the ruling, arguing against the characterization of the delay as willful defiance. The Supreme Court, recognizing the quasi-judicial nature of contempt proceedings, underscored the importance of intent in determining culpability.
In their ruling, the justices reiterated, “The proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act are quasi-judicial in nature, and therefore, as the Court comes to a conclusion that the act was neither deliberate nor wilful, it could not have convicted the appellants for Contempt of Courts Act.”
Consequently, the Supreme Court upheld the appeal of the officer, overturning the earlier verdict of the High Court. This decision sets a significant precedent, highlighting the importance of intent in contempt proceedings and ensuring judicial leniency where appropriate.
