Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.35 seconds)Section 13 in The Contempt Of Courts Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
Section 9 in The Contempt Of Courts Act, 1971 [Entire Act]
Jaswant Singh vs Virender Singh And Ors on 9 November, 1994
17. It has been observed by the Supreme Court in Jasivant Singh v. Virender Singh, 1995 Supp. (1) SCC 384 that an Advocate has no wider protection than a layman when he commits an act which amounts to contempt of Court, and that Judges cannot be intimidated to seek favourable orders, and that an Advocate cannot use language, either in the pleadings or during arguments, which is either intemperate or unparliamentary, and that "these safeguards are not for the protection of any Judge individually but are essential for maintaining the dignity and decorum of the Courts and for upholding the majesty of law". Having said so, the Supreme Court further observed as follows:
Lalit Mohan Das vs Advocate-General, Orissa on 29 November, 1956
A member of the Bar must uphold the dignity and decorum of the Court and must not do anything to bring the Court itself into disrepute (Lalit Mohan Das v. Advocate General, Orissa, .
Andre Paul Terence Ambard vs The Attorney General Of Trinidad And ... on 2 March, 1936
"Before we part with this topic, we would like to refer to one aspect of the question relating to the exercise of power to punish for contempt. So far as the Courts are concerned, Judges always keep in mind the warning addressed to them by Lord Atkin in Andre Paul v. Attorney-General of Trinidad, AIR 1936 PC 141. Said Lord Atkin, "Justice is not a cloistered virtue; she must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful even though out-spoken comments of ordinary men." We ought never to forget that the power to punish for contempt large as it is, must always be exercised cautiously, wisely and with circumspection. Frequent or indiscriminate use of this power in anger or irritation would not help to sustain the dignity or status of the Court, but may sometimes affect it adversely. "Wise Judges never forget that the best way to sustain the dignity and status of their office is to deserve respect from the public at large by the quality of their judgments, the fearlessness, fairness and objectivity of their approach, and by the restraint, dignity and decorum which they observe in their judicial conduct."
Delhi Judicial Service Association Tis ... vs State Of Gujarat And Ors. Etc-Etc on 11 September, 1991
22. This should have sufficed for allowing the Writ Petition. We have also considered whether any contempt is made out on the facts of the present case because this Court has the power to initiate contempt proceedings suo motu in exercise of its inherent power by virtue of Article 215 of the Constitution of India (Delhi Judicial Service Association v. State of Gujarat, , and also on a motion made by the Advocate General. We do not find any such.