Court Must Not Be Hypersensitive: Punjab and Haryana High Court in Contempt Case

High Court dismisses criminal contempt proceedings against petitioner for remarks about judicial delays, emphasizing the importance of public faith in the judiciary. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed criminal contempt proceedings against a petitioner who criticized a Judicial Magistrate for alleged delays in handling his case. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Anupinder Singh Grewal and Kirti Singh, highlights the importance of not being hypersensitive to criticism and underscores the judiciary's accountability to the public.

The contempt proceedings were initiated suo motu by a Single Bench after the respondent, Surjeet Singh, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., alleging that the Judicial Magistrate at Dera Bassi was inclined to give adjournments rather than pass orders, causing harassment. The Single Bench referred to the zimni orders, which showed that adjournments were primarily at the request of the respondent’s counsel, and thus initiated contempt proceedings.

The court emphasized the principle that justice must endure public scrutiny and outspoken comments from ordinary citizens. It referenced various Supreme Court rulings, noting that criticism of judicial conduct, when made in good faith, does not constitute contempt. "Justice is not a cloistered virtue; she must be allowed to suffer the scrutiny and respectful, even though outspoken, comments of ordinary men," the court remarked, citing established legal precedents.

The judgment extensively discussed the definition and scope of criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. It clarified that for an act to constitute criminal contempt, it must scandalize or lower the authority of the court, interfere with judicial proceedings, or obstruct the administration of justice. The court found that the respondent’s remarks, though factually incorrect, were made in an attempt to seek expeditious disposal of his case and did not meet the threshold for criminal contempt.

Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal noted, "The contempt jurisdiction should not be exercised lightly at the drop of a hat. It ought to be invoked only in rare or exceptional cases where there is interference with administration of justice or such action amounts to scandalizing or lowering the authority of the Court."

The High Court's decision to drop the criminal contempt proceedings underscores the judiciary's commitment to maintaining public confidence and allowing constructive criticism. By emphasizing the need for the judiciary to be open to scrutiny and not overly sensitive to criticism, the judgment reinforces the principles of transparency and accountability in the administration of justice.

Date of Decision: July 1, 2024