5 months ago
1
Observing that the powerfulness to punish for transgression contempt is not a “personal armour” for judges to stifle criticism, the Supreme Court connected Wednesday (December 10, 2025) acceptable speech an April 23 bid of the Bombay High Court that had held a Navi Mumbai pistillate blameworthy of transgression contempt and sentenced her to 1 week’s elemental imprisonment for circulating a lodging nine announcement referring to judges arsenic portion of a “dog mafia.”
A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta noted that the pistillate had expressed unconditional remorse astatine the earliest signifier and had tendered an unqualified apology for her conduct.
“In workout of contempt jurisdiction, courts indispensable stay conscious that this powerfulness is not a idiosyncratic armour for judges, nor a sword to soundlessness criticism. After all, it requires fortitude to admit contrition for one’s lapse, and an adjacent greater virtuousness to widen forgiveness to the erring. Mercy, therefore, indispensable stay an integral portion of the judicial conscience, to beryllium extended wherever the contemnor sincerely acknowledges his lapse and seeks to atone for it”, the ruling said.
What constitutes arsenic contempt of tribunal successful India? | Explained
The judges further observed that a holistic speechmaking of Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (1971 Act), makes it wide that the proviso not lone authorises the imposition of punishment but besides expressly preserves the court’s powerfulness to remit it. This discretion, the Bench underscored, survives adjacent aft a uncovering of guilt and the grant of punishment.
“The statutory strategy is frankincense clear, erstwhile repentance is demonstrated, the tribunal whitethorn enactment with magnanimity. However, the apology indispensable beryllium bona fide and indispensable fulfill the judicial conscience of the court, which is required to workout this discretion judiciously”, the Bench said.
Earlier, the High Court had taken suo motu cognisance of a circular issued successful January by the woman, Vineeta Srinandan, taste manager of Mumbai’s Seawoods Estates Limited, noting that the remarks it contained were intended to obstruct the medication of justness and interfere with the owed people of judicial proceedings. The circular was issued portion a lawsuit concerning the feeding of stray dogs successful the Seawoods analyzable was pending earlier the High Court, successful which residents had challenged the validity of Rule 20 of the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023. The regularisation obligates nonmigratory payment associations and flat proprietor associations to make designated spaces for feeding stray animals. The Seawoods analyzable houses implicit 1,500 residents successful Navi Mumbai.
Opinion: Contempt powers, successful the people’s name
The High Court had held that the circular carried “serious insinuations” against judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court, and rejected Ms. Srinandan’s contention that she was unaware of the implications of issuing specified remarks. It had besides declined to judge her apology, uncovering that it did not show contrition oregon genuine remorse. Consequently, the tribunal had imposed a good of ₹2,000 and directed that she acquisition imprisonment for a play of 1 week.
Deprecating the attack adopted by the High Court, the apex tribunal observed that it had failed to workout its contempt jurisdiction with the requisite circumspection, peculiarly since Ms. Srinandan had, from the precise archetypal time of her quality successful the suo motu proceedings, expressed remorse and tendered an unconditional apology.
It further noted that Section 12 of the 1971 Act clarifies that an apology request not beryllium rejected simply due to the fact that it is qualified oregon conditional, truthful agelong arsenic it is tendered bona fide. The statutory framework, it said, recognises that erstwhile a contemnor offers sincere remorse, the tribunal is empowered to judge it and, wherever appropriate, discharge the contemnor oregon remit the condemnation imposed.
“In our opinion, successful the lack of immoderate worldly suggesting that the apology was lacking successful bona fides, the High Court ought to person considered remitting the condemnation successful accordance with law,” the Bench said, mounting speech the bid of the High Court.
In its 21-page ruling, the High Court had observed that though Section 12 of the 1971 Act prescribes a punishment of up to 6 months oregon a good of up to ₹2,000, oregon both, for the offence, it had imposed a comparatively shorter sentence on Ms. Srinandan. In our wide opinion, the contemnor has taken each accidental to justify, connected merits, the circumstances successful which she issued specified objectionable writing, portion simultaneously reciting the apology mantra. We bash not judge immoderate apology that does not bespeak contrition oregon genuine remorse. Such an apology, successful our view, is simply a antiaircraft limb precocious successful the content that the contemnor tin flight the consequences by its recital,” the High Court had recorded successful its order.
