THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971

An Act to define and limit the powers of certain courts in

punishing contempts of courts and to regulate their procedure in
relation thereto.
Be it enacted by Parliament in the Twenty-second Year of the
Republic of India as follows :
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.
2. Definitions. In this Act, unless the context otherwise
requires,
(a) contempt of court means civil contempt or criminal
contempt;
(b) civil contempt means wilful disobedience to any
judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a
court or wilful 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;
(d) 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
Breach of an undertaking given to a Court by a person in civil
proceedings, on the faith of which the Court sanctions a
course of action is misconduct amounting to contempt of
court. Noorali Babul Thanewala v. K.M.M. Shetty, AIR 1990
S.C. 464.
The power to penalise an officer of the Court should be
exercised in those cases where the order is deliberately not
obeyed or compliance is not made. C.P. Singh v. State of
Rajasthan, 1993 Cr.L.J. 125.
Advocate making libellous allegations against sitting Judges
of High Court amounts to interference with administration of
justice. Pritam Lal v. High Court of M.P. 1992 Cr.L.J. 1269= AIR
1992 SC 904
What it constitutes Scandalising Court or Judge,
undermining people's confidence in administration of justice
and bringing or tending to bring the Court into disrepute or
disrespect tantamount to criminal contempt Scurrilous attack
on a Judge questioning his authority would amount to
contempt. Dr. D.C. Saxena v. Hon'ble The C.J.I., J.T. 1996(6)
S.C. 529 = 1996(5) SCC 216.
Civil contempt Where action of contemner is wilful, deliberate
and in clear disregard of Court's order, it amounts to civil
contempt. Amar Bahadurising v. P.D. Wasnik and others. 1994
Cri.L.J 1359 =1994(2) Bom CR 464 (Bom)
Contempt proceedings Initiated on basis of the report of an
official Principles of natural justice require that the copy of
the report should be furnished to contemner and opportunity
be
afforded to put forth his say against the report. A.
Dharmarajan v. Collector of Kamarajar Distt. Virduhunagar
Distt. and others. 1994 Cri.L.J 3585 (Madras)
Contempt Consequential directions Can be issued for
enforcing order. Dr. Subhash Chandra Pratihar v. Mr. Leena
Chakraborty and others. 1995 Cri.L.J. 707 (Cal.)
Contempt Sentence The fact that the petitioner is an I.A.S
officer is of no consequence so far as the sentence is
concerned. J. Vasudevan v. T.R. Dhananjaya. 1995 Cri.L.J.
4192 (S.C)
Criminal contempt Illegal mining Petitioner environmental
activists Visiting area of inspection along with Committee
constituted by Supreme Court Petitioner manhandled by mine
owner Mine owner guilty of criminal contempt. Tarun Bharat
Sangh Alwar v. Union of India and others. 1993 Cri.L.J. 50 =
AIR 1993 SC 293 = 1992 Supp(2) SCC 750 (SC)
Breach of undertaking Inability to vacate house as his son
had become major Stand taken found to be dishonest
Conviction ordered. Venubai Saveleram Songaonkar v.
Gajanan Savleram alias Sawalaram Songaonkar and other.
1992 Cri.L.J. 1160 (Bom)
Criminal contempt Advocates storming various court rooms
Individually and collectively stood on chairs, table and dias of
Court Prevented various lawyers from discharging their
judicial functions Are guilty of contempt of court. Court of its
own motion v. B.D. Kaushik and others. 1993 Cri.L.J. 336
(Delhi)
Contempt proceedings Are not criminal proceedings Are
proceedings of summary nature. Vidya Charan Shukla v. Tamil
Nadu Olympic Association. 1991 Cri.L.J. 2722 = AIR 1991 Mad
323 (Mad)
Civil contempt Interim order passed by Supreme Court
subsequent action in filing civil suit seeking injunction
Amounts to contempt. Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper
Construction and another 1995 Cri.L.J. 2107 (SC)
Review Order holding person guilty of contempt cannot be
reviewed, Senior Sub-Judge.
Dharamsala v. R.A. Kansal. 1991 Cri.L.J 2432 = 1991(2) Rec
Cri.R. 677 (H.P)
 Criminal Contempt Notice containing allegations and
scandalour remarks Advocate who drafted notice cannot
escape liability. Shamsher Singh Bedi v. High Court of P & H.
1995 Cri.L.J. 3627 (SC)
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 signs, 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.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this
(2)
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 purpose of this section, a judicial
proceeding
(a) is said to be pending
(A) in the case of a civil proceeding, when it is instituted by
the filing of a plaint or otherwise,
(B) in the case of a criminal proceeding under the i[1] [Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1895 (5 of 1898], or any other law
(i)where it relates to the commission of an offence, when
the charge sheet 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 cognizance of
the matter to which the proceeding relates, and 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 is preferred, until
the period of limitation prescribed for such appeal or
revision has expired;
(b) 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.
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 stage
thereof.
5. Fair criticism of judicial act no 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
Criticism of Court when transgresses the limits of fair and
bona fide criticism amounts to contempt of court. (Aswini
Kumar Ghose v. Arbinda Bose, AIR 1953 S. C. 75).
6.Complaint agai nst 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 of 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.
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 a judicial proceeding 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 a 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 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
a secret process, discovery or invention, or in exercise of any
power vested in 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.
9. Actnot 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 would not be so
punishable apart from this Act.
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 contempt of courts
subordinate to it as it has and exercises in respect of
contempts of itself:
Provided that no High Court shall take cognizance 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
High Court can take action for contempt of subordinate court
under Section 2 of 1926 Acts for defamation of the Judge
though the aggrieved officer may have remedies such as Sec.
499 I.P.C. (Bathina Ramakrishna Reddy v. State of Madras,
AIR 1952 S.C. 149)
High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 10 cannot
interfere with the complaints filed for disobedience of breach of
injunction order temporarily issued during the pendency of a
suit. Shaik Mohiddin v. Section Officer, Karnataka Electricity
Board, Kaiwara.1994 Cri.L.J.3689 = ILR (Kar) 1994 2513
(kant)
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 the
local limits of its jurisdiction, and whether the person alleged
to be guilty of contempt is within or outside such limits.
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 (1) for any contempt either in
respect of itself or of a court subordinate to it.
Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, where a
(3)
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 he be detained in a civil
prison for such period not exceeding six months as it may
think fit.
Where the person found guilty of contempt of court in
(4)
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)Nothwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4),
where the contempt of court referred to therein has been
committed by a company and it is proved that the contempt
has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is
attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director,
manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such
director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also 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 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

Ad interim injunction limited to specific period, No

extension No contempt if violation is alleged after expiry of
stipulated period. N.Rathinasabapathy v. K.S. Palaniappa
Kandar. 1995 Cri.L.J. 3622 (SC)
Criminal Contempt newspaper article Liability of editor
extends to all acts committed pertaining to publication. B.A.
 Rather and another v. H.K. Dua and other. 1994 Cir.L.J.
3414 (J & K).
Illegal confinement during the period when appellant was
on anticipatory bail Act confining to prison not only
atrocious but interfering with due course of justice and
amounting to deliberate attempt to obstruct administration
of justice Simple imprisonment of one month awarded for
illegal confinement. Rajendra Kumar & anr. Versus State of
Rajasthan and Other. 1996 Cr. R. 852 (Raj).
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.
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 it 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 discharged of
such person as may be just.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),
where a person charged with contempt under that 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 the interests 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 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.
15. Cognizance 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, ii[2] [or]
iii [3] [(c) 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 person, 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 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.
Every motion or reference made under this section shall
(3)
specify the contempt of which the person charged is alleged to
be guilty.
Explanation. In this section, the expression Advocate-General
means
(a) in relation to the Supreme Court, the Attorney-General 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.
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 person acting
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 shall, so far as may be,
apply accordingly.
(2) Nothing in this section shall apply to any observations or
remarks made by a judge, magistrate or other person acting
judicially, regarding a subordinate court in an appeal or
revision pending before such judge, magistrate or the person
against the order or judgment of the subordinate court.
Comments

Contempt proceedings against Judicial Officer are

maintainable. Baba Abdul Khan v.
Smt. A.D. Sawant. J.M.F.C., Nagpur and other, 1994 Cir.L.J.
2836 (Bom.)
17.Procedure after cognizance. (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), 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 his 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,
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.
19.Appeals. (1) An appeal shall lie as of right from any order
or 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 Judge 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 satisfies 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 thirty days;
(b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme
Court, within sixty days, from the date of
the order appealed against.
Comments

AppealNo appeal lies to a Division Bench against the order

of a leamed single Judge dismissing the application filed for
contempt of Court. S. Sammaiah and Other v. Andhra Pradesh
State Electricity Board. 1994 Cri. J. 3830 = 1994(2) Andh LT
729= 1994 (2) APLJ 264(A.P.)
20.Limitation for actions for contempt. No court shall
initiate any proceedings of 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.

Comment

Contempt proceedingsPower of High CourtIs absolute and

unfettered. A. Mayilswami v. State of kerala (FB) 1995 Cri.L.J.
3830 (Kerala)
21. Act not to apply to Nyaya Panchayats 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 provisions of
any other law relating to contempt of courts.
23. Power of Supreme Court and High Courts to make rules.
The Supreme Court or, as the 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.
24. Repeal. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 (32 of 1952), is
hereby repealed.
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2006

NO. 6 OF 2006
[17th March, 2006.]

An Act further to amend the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Fifty-seventh Year of the

Republic of India as follows:-

1. Short title.-
This Act may be called the Contempt of Courts
(Amendment) Act, 2006.

2. Substitution of new section for section 13.-

In the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971), for section
13, the following section shall be substituted, namely:-

"13. Contempts not punishable in certain cases.-Notwithstanding

anything contained in any law for the time being in force,-

(a) 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;

(b) the court may permit, in any proceeding for contempt of court,
justification by truth as a valid defence if it is satisfied that it is in
public interest and the request for invoking the said defence is
bona fide.''.
 Bill No. 158 of 2015

THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2015

A
BILL
further to amend the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971.
BE it enacted by Parliament in the Sixty-sixth Year of the
Republic of India as follows:—
1. (1) This Act may be called Contempt of Courts
(Amendment) Act, 2015.
(2) It shall come into force on such date as Central
Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
appoint.

Amen 2.In section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 7 of

dment 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), in 1971
of clause (c), in sub-clause (i), for the words
sectio “scandalises or tends to scandalise”, the words
n 2. “scandalises or tends to scandlise to the extent that
it undermine or tends to undermine the
administration of justice or public confidence 5
therein” shall be substituted.
3.In section 13 of the principal Act, for clause
(a), the following clause shall be substituted,
namely:—
Amend
ment “ (a) no court shall impose a sentence under
of this Act for a contempt of court unless it is
section satisfied that there is a mala fide intention and a
13. real, clear and imminent danger to discredit the
administration of justice or the contempt is of 10
such a nature that it substantially interferes, or
tends substantially to interfere with the due
course of justice.”.
 ANNEXURE
EXTRACT FROM THE CONTEMPT OF
COURTS ACT, 1971 (70 OF 1971)

2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

“criminal contempt” means the publication (whether
(c)
by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible
representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of
any other act whatsoever which—
scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or
(i)
tends to lower the authority of, any court; or
13. Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in
force,—
no Court shall impose a sentence under this Act for a
(a)
contempt of court unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of
such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends
substantially with the due course of justice.
 A BILL

further to amend the Contempt of Court Ordinance,

2003

WHEREAS it is expedient further to amend the Contempt of

Court Ordinance, 2003 (Ordinance No. IV of 2003) for the purposes
hereinafter appearing;

It is hereby enacted as follows:-

1. Short title and commencement.- (1) This Act may be called

the Contempt of Court (Amendment) Act, 2016.
(2) It shall come into force at once.

2. Amendment of section 3, Ordinance IV of 2003.- In the

Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 (Ordinance No. IV of 2003),
hereinafter referred to as the said Ordinance, in section 3, the
words, "or to lower the authority of a court", shall be omitted.
3. Amendment of section 5, Ordinance IV of 2003.- In the
said Ordinance, in section 5, for sub-section (1), the following shall
be substituted, namely:-

“(1) Subject to sub-section (2), any person who commits

contempt of Court shall be punished,-

(a) with imprisonment which may extend to six

months simple imprisonment, or with fine
which may extend to one hundred thousand
rupees, or with both, in case of criminal
contempt and judicial contempt; and

(b) with fine which may extend to one hundred

thousand rupees, in case of civil contempt.”