The expression used in Article 129 is not restrictive instead it is extensive in nature. If the Framers of the Constitution intended that the Supreme Court shall have power to punish for contempt of itself only, there was no necessity for inserting the expression “including the power to punish for contempt of itself’. The Article confers power on the Supreme Court to punish for contempt of itself and in addition, it confers some additional power relating to contempt as would appear from the expression ‘including”. Court of Record is a court where acts and judicial proceedings are enrolled in parchment for a perpetual memorial and testimony, which rolls are called the “record” of the court, and are of such high and super eminent authority that their truth is not to be questioned.”

In Sukhdev Singh Sodhi v. The Chief Justice and Judges of the PEPSU High Court, [1954] SCR 454, supreme Court considered the origin, history and development of the concept of inherent jurisdiction of a court of record in India. The Court after considering Privy Council and High Courts’ decisions held that the High Court being a court of record has inherent power to punish for contempt of subordinate courts. The Court further held that even after the codification of the law of contempt in India the High Court’s jurisdiction as a court of record to initiate proceedings and take seisin of the matter remained unaffected by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926. The power to punish for contempt even in the absence of express provisions The Court has the duty of protecting the interest of the community in the due administration of justice and, so, it is entrusted with the power to commit for contempt of court, not to protect the dignity of the Court against insult or injury, but, to protect and vindicate the right of the public so that the administration of justice is not perverted, prejudiced, obstructed or interfered with. Gives a distillation of legal concepts providing a first point of reference for research or for understanding an unfamiliar area of law The High Court as a court of record and as the protector of public justice throughout its jurisdiction has power to deal with contempts directed against the administration of justice, whether those contempts are committed in face of the court or outside it, and independently or whether the particular court is sitting or not sitting, and whether those contempts relate to proceedings directly concerning itself or whether they relate to proceedings concerning an inferior court, and in the latter case whether those proceedings might or might not at some stage come before the High Court.” Includes medical ebooks previously available through the Oxford Medicine Online platform. To access medicine content, select "Subject" -> "Medicine and Health".Section 3 of the 1952 Act again reiterated and reaffirmed the power, authority and jurisdiction of the High Court in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it, as it existed prior to the enactment. It provided that every High Court shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction, power and authority, in accordance with the same procedure and practice in respect of contempt of courts subordinate to it as it has and exercise in respect of contempt of itself. This title is typically used in conjunction with Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary and is regularly cited to and by the courts.

Westlaw UK's smart navigation, links to primary law in combination with the expertise within our portfolio of books providing you with a seamless, coherent, and integrated research experience every time you need to refer to the text.

In England a superior court of record has been exercised power to indict a person for the contempt of its authority and also for the contempt of its subordinate and inferior courts in a summary manner without the aid and assistance of Jury. This power was conceded as a necessary attribute of a superior court of record under Anglo Saxon System of Jurisprudence.

In Attorney General v. Times Newspapers, [1974] A.C. 273 at p. 302 the necessity for the law of contempt was summarised by Lord Morris as:

Change Website Language

A court whereof the acts and judicial proceedings are enrolled for a perpetual memorial and testimony, and which has power to fine and imprison for contempt of its authority.”

Thoroughly revised and updated since the last edition in 1977, this new edition covers English law from earliest times up to the present day, providing detailed explanations of legal terms as well as their historical context. It is open to the Court to cross-examine the contemner and even if the contemner is found to be guilty of contempt, the Court may accept apology and discharge the notice of contempt, whereas tendering of apology is no defence to the trial of a criminal offence. This peculiar feature distinguishes contempt proceedings from criminal proceedings. In a criminal trial where a person is accused of an offence there is a public prosecutor who prosecutes the case on behalf of the prosecution against the accused but in contempt proceedings the court is both the accused as well as the judge of the accusation. Madras High Court in the case of Venkat Rao, 21 Madras Law Journal 832 held that it being a court of record had the power to deal with the contempt of subordinate courts.

Check-In

In India, the courts have followed the English practice in holding that a court of record has power of summarily punishing contempt of itself as well as of subordinate courts. First published in 1959, Jowitt’s Dictionary of English Law is the authority to be cited and relied upon in court when establishing the definition of each expression which forms part of the fabric of English law. Undelivered judgment of Wilmot, J. has been subject of great controversy in England’ and Sir John Fox has severely criticised Almon’s case, in his celebrated book “The History of Contempt of Court’, The Form of Trial and Mode of Punishment: In spite of serious criticism of the judgment of Wilmot, J. the opinion ex- pressed by him has all along been followed by the English and Commonwealth Courts.