CIVIL CONTEMPT V. CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
Contempt in general parlance means disgrace or disregard for something. The legal analogy of the term translates to disrespect towards a court of law and its officers.
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, contempt is the act
of demeaning the court, preventing justice administration, or disobeying a
sentence of the court. It is criminal and can lead to fines or imprisonment.[1]
The offence of contempt is partly criminal
and partly civil in nature which is perceptible from the definition of Contempt
under section 2(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971(hereinafter referred to
as the act) as civil contempt or criminal contempt. The act thus divides
the expression ‘contempt’ into two parts:
1.
Civil
contempt
2.
Criminal
contempt
Definition-
Civil contempt is defined by section 2(b) of
the act as,
“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”
For example; in a case of
maintenance, the court orders the husband to give the wife 1/3rd of
his earnings every month. The husband does not abide by the order and is thus
liable for civil contempt.
Criminal contempt is defined
by section 2(c) of the act as,
“the publication (whether 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—
(i)
scandalizes or
tends to scandalize, 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”
For example: Consider
hypothetically that LawVastutah on its twitter account posts the following
tweet-
“Indian courts are useless!
Haven’t been able to do justice to SSR till now. Dear Modiji, please help our
SSR get justice.”
The above post scandalizes the
entire judicial system and lowers the authority of the courts in India implying
that a third party will be able to do justice better than the courts.
Therefore, LawVastutah will be guilty of criminal contempt.
Consider another instance, say
if an author of LawVastutah files a case against the founder member for sexual
harassment. The founder member threatens the author to withdraw the suit or she
will lose her job. This amounts to a hinderance in the administration of
justice by the court. Hence, the founder member would be held guilty of
criminal contempt.
A Canadian case
explains in detail the difference between civil and criminal contempt,
Everywoman's
Health Centre Society (1988) v. Bridges,
“A civil
contempt is one where the dispute is entirely between private parties which
does not threaten the proper administration of justice. A criminal contempt is
one where, because of the nature of the conduct in question, the issues
transcend the interests of the parties, and the public has an interest in
ensuring the proper administration of justice”.
Civil contempt is thus
basically a legal leeway for a party to enforce its rights which are entitled
to him/her through a court order. Civil contempt may be brought by the injured
party and he/she can choose to let it go.
Criminal contempt is where the
authority of the court has been defied by a party leading to an interference or
an obstruction in justice. The injured party here is the court and justice.
An illustration to explain the
difference between civil and criminal contempt, the court orders the father
(Ross) of a child (Ben) to hand over the custody of the child to his mother,
Susan. Ross does not abide by order as his second wife (Rachel) instigates him
that if he does as ordered by the court, then Susan would never let him see
Ben. Here, Ross would be liable for civil contempt as he disobeyed the order of
the court whereas Rachel would be guilty of criminal contempt as she interfered
in the course of justice.
Purpose-
The major factor of
distinction between civil and criminal contempt is the purpose or the object of
using the power of the court to institute a contempt proceeding. The purpose of
civil contempt is to compel the contemnor to obey a court order for the benefit
of the complainant whereas of
criminal contempt is to discipline a person for undermining the authority of the court
or interfering in the natural course of justice.[2]
Therefore, civil contempt
proceedings are a form of execution wherein a sanction is imposed to assure the
compliance of an order by the contemnor or compensate for any damages which are
sustained by the complained due to the non-compliance of the contemnor.
Whereas, criminal contempt
proceedings are initiated to preserve and vindicate the court’s authority and
punish for disobedience of its orders.
To summarise, the aim of civil contempt is capitulation whereas that of criminal contempt is penance.
Sanction-
Civil contempt is an attempt at affecting the
future actions of a party whereas criminal contempt punished the past
actions of a person. In civil contempt, the order given by the court is to
compensate the injured party for the losses whereas in criminal contempt the
order given by the court is to reinstate the authority of the court. Thus, the
nature of sanction in civil contempt proceedings is remedial while in
criminal contempt proceedings, it is punitive.
Mixed Contempt-
There have been various Indian cases[3] which
describe a mixed type of contempt which constitutes of non-compliance of the order
of the court, defiance of the court, and such
conduct which interferes with the course of justice. Such type of contempt
neither entirely civil nor entirely criminal is categorized as sui generis.
BY
LAWVASTUTAH
Comments
Post a Comment