Criminal contempt? Not now, My Lords
The HinduThe Supreme Court has found lawyer Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt of court for two tweets. However, in Bridges vs California, the U.S. Supreme Court raised the question as to whether the court should still exercise its powers to punish by contempt, out of court publications, on the basis of a practice that was “deeply rooted under English common law at the time the constitution was adopted” and adopting English common law in this field was to deny the generally accepted historical belief that the objects of the American Revolution was to get rid of English common law on liberty of speech and of press”. However, in the U.S., in the Justice Manual, “contempt of court” is still defined as “an act of disobedience or disrespect towards the judicial branch of the government, or an interference with its orderly process. Before that, when the Constitution of India was framed, Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution empowered the Supreme Court and the High Courts respectively “to punish for contempt of itself”. Civil contempt is wilful disobedience of the court orders whereas criminal contempt is to “scandalise or lower the authority of court”, “prejudicing or interfering with the administration of judicial proceedings and or administration of justice”.