Contempt of Court
Contempt of Court
Whether
a learned Counsel may bring any matter to the notice of the Court that may, in
his view, call for an action under the Contempt of Court Act.
Whether
an Advocate has every right to represent his client and protect his interests
by filing an appeal before the appellate forum.
(i) A
learned Counsel may bring any matter to the notice of the Court that may, in
his view, call for an action under the Con- tempt of Court Act.
(ii)
An Advocate has every right to represent his client and protect his interests
by filing an appeal before the appellate forum, but he cannot, while the appeal
is pending, ascribing somethings, by publishing a news report in his capacity
as a Court reporter, which is not in the judgment. M. SaleemUllah Vs. The State
13BLD (AD)3
Ref:
15 DLR(SC) 355, AIR 1936 (P.C) 141 at pages 145-146; 28DLR(HCD)285; St. James
Evening Post Case,(1742) 2ATK649; (1895)11 TIR 1976; (1922) Ich. 276; (1900)
2QB 36(at pp 40); (1899) AC 549(4); 2 EHRR 245 Cited
Contempt
of Court
By
making absurd comments, uninformed criticism and vituperative innuendoes on the
judgments of the Appellate Division, the learned Judges of the High Court Division
have placed themselves well within the perimeter of Contempt of Court Act (XII
of 1926)
Md.
Sher Ali and others Vs. The State and another) 14BLD(AD) 84 Ref: 35 DLR. (AD)
147; 45 DLR(AD) 9 and 175; A.I.R. 1945 (PC) 18.
Contempt
of Court
The
power of the High Court Division to institute a contempt proceeding is a
special one. It is competent to deal with the matter summarily and to adopt its
own procedure. Contempt of Court Act (XII of 1926) Ss. 2&3 Badsha Mia and
others Vs. Abdul Latif Majumder and others, 14BLD(AD) 237 Ref: A. I. R. 1954
(SC) 186-Cited
Contempt
of Court
A
statement which neither directly nor indirectly imputes any aspersion to a
Judge and the Court nor does it contain any scandalous statement against a
Judge or the Judiciary to lower down its image in the estimation of the general
public but serves as a constructive criticism relating to the mode of appointment
of the Judges of the Supreme Court does not constitute contempt of Court. It is
more so, when the disputed statement makes no reference to the judgment of any
Judge of either Division of the Supreme Court or of any Judge subordinate
thereto- Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 (XII of 1926) Section.3
Dr.
Ahmed Husain Vs. Shamsul Hug Chowdhury, 16BLD(HCD)116
Contempt
of Court
A
bonafide and honest criticism of a judicial exercise is permissible only when
it is aimed at improving its quality by way of healthy and constructive
criticism. But when a writing is couched in scandalous and offensive language and
it brings the Court into disrespect and disrepute in the eye of the general
public and castigates its dignity and majesty, the writer concerned does commit
contempt of the Court-Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 Section.3
The
Judges of the High Court Division Vs. Ashok Kumar Karmaker and others,
16BLD(HCD)233
Contempt
of Court
Arms
of the High Court Division are long enough to catch and punish any delinquent
how high soever-Contempt of Court Act, 1926 (XII of 1926) Sections-2 and 3
Almas
Ali Vs. Sohrab Miah and others, 17BLD (HCD) 150
Contempt
of Court
The
issuance of the Rule for contempt of Court, appearance of the opposite party
be- fore the Court in person as per direction of the Court, expression of
sorrow and remorse before the Court by the opposite party together with his
past sufferings and the de- tailed description of prevailing circumstances and
the recent happenings are sufficient grounds to take a lenient view towards him
in the instant case. It is expected that journalists should be very vigilant,
alert and careful in the future in publishing Court proceedings and news and in
making comments with regard to the judiciary-Contempt Court Act. 1926;
Sections.2 and 3
The
State Vs. ShafiqueRehman, 17BLD (HCD) 278
Contempt
of Court
Refusal
to give a hearing to a contemner is the judicial discretion of the Court. But
this discretion has to be exercised sparingly. The Court may, however, refuse
to hear a contemner for gross violation of the Court's order impeding the
course of justice. Sections-2 and 3
Quasem
Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. Bangla- deshShilpaRinSangstha, 17BLD (HCD) 625
Ref:
1868 L.R. Vol.IV Court of Exche- quer, 13; 46DLR617; 82 I.C. 292 and (1990)2
All. E.R. 1; (1952) 2 All E.R. 567 at page 574 Cited
Contempt
of Court
The
jurisdiction of contempt must be taken with utmost care so that it is not used
on occasions or in cases to which it is not ap- propriate. In the instant case,
the learned Judges of the High Court Division took a too drastic step for
punishing the appellant for contempt of court, being a little touchy and unduly
sensative, which was not at all called for-Contempt Court Act, 1926; Sections.2
and 3.
S.A.M.
Iqbal Vs. The State and another, 18BLD (AD) 195
Ref:
A.IR. 1958 (Calcutta) 474; 14DLR (SC)273; 15 DLR(SC)150-Cited
Contempt
of Court
In
both the news items it has not been stated that the borrower would be able to
pay on the basis of earlier re-schedulement of the loan and a picture was
deliberately depicted as if this Court stood in the way of the bor- rower's
repayment of the loan. It appears in both the news items this Court has been maligned
and scandalized to lower it in the estimatation of the members of the public.
In both the news items name of the reporter has not been published. Therefore
the Rule was issued only on the editors and publisher and printer. The High
Court Division can very much realies that the contemners have been used as
persons by some unseen hands to make the borrower a hero at the cost of honour
and prestige of this Court.
It is
grossest type of contempt to malign and scandalize the highest Court and its Judges
by publishing untrue and twisted news and comment in the newspaper. The High
Court Division held that the contemners guilty of committing contempt of this
Court. Since the contemners have tendered unqualified apology and have thrown
themselves to the mercy of this Court considering that they are not the authors
of the contemptuous writing, this court decided to accept their apology subject
to the direction-Contempt Court Act, 1926; Sections-2 and 3
Shahidul
Islam Vs. MahbubulAlam&ors., 19BLD (HCD) 601
আদালত অবমাননা আইনের
অধীনে
ব্যবস্থা গ্রহণের কোনও
ভিত্তি
না
পেলে
দায়রা
জজ
বা
অন্য
কোনও
বিচারিক কর্মকর্তা এসব
আবেদন
এই
আদালতে
প্ররণের জন্য
কেবল
পোস্ট
বাক্স
হিসেবে
কাজ
করবেন
না।
আনোয়ারুল হক
বনাম
গোলাম
মাহমুদ
ও
মোঃ
মহসিন,
৫১
ডিএলআর
(১৯৯৯)
২৪২
Contempt of Courts Act, 1926
Section 2(3) This section provides for certain cases of contempt of lawful authority of a court of justice committed in presence of the court. It is a direct contempt of court and empowers all courts including a court of Magistrate or an Assistant Judge to punish an offender be he a lawyer or anyone else summarily in respect of the offences mentioned therein. The subordinate courts can sufficiently vindicate their dignity by proceeding against the offenders under this provision, Legislature has deemed it proper to exclude such cases from the jurisdiction of the High Court Division under section 2(3) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926. Bangladesh -VS- Naznin Begum (Most) (3 LM (AD) 66]
Facebook Status- We believe that the contemnor will not commit such an offence again. However, he admits the fact that he has committed the offence and thus the damage of bringing the Court and the administration of justice to disrepute has been done. The two items published by the contemnor in the social media, namely Facebook are a direct affront to the constitutional authority of the Honourable Chief Justice and the Supreme Court and had the effect of lowering the dignity of the position of the Honourable Chief Justice and the Supreme Court. Evidently the contemnor achieved his intended goal as can be seen by the posts of his followers who apparently supported his views and applauded his comments.
At the time of issuing notice upon the contemnor on 12.08.2020 he was directed not to appear before any Bench of the Supreme Court from that date until his appearance in court on 20.08.20. He has thus suffered the inability to exercise his privilege of appearing before the Supreme Court for nine days
We find that the contemnor has admitted his guilt. However, in view of his apology and assurance that he will never commit such offence again, and the fact that he has refrained from appearing before any Bench of the Supreme Court as ordered by this Court, we are not inclined to take the matter any further. This contempt proceeding is disposed of. Government of Bangladesh -VS- Syed Mamun Mahbub, (9 LM (AD) 674]
Contempt- The contemners stated that they have already withdrawn the letter of cancellation of lease and intimated the lessee (petitioner) to get back the impugned 'Ghat' for collection of toll under the lease agreement. The contemners have already complied with the order passed by this Court, we are inclined to accept their unconditional apology as the same has been filed at the earliest opportunity. Accordingly, this contempt petition is disposed of and the contemners are exonerated from the charge of contempt. Alamgir Hossain (Afd.) VS Mohammad Mubarak Hossain. 17 LM (AD) 246]
General Principles of Legal Ethics, the moral responsibilities of a Counsel
(a) In theory it is the King or Sovereign who presides in the Court of justice and the Judge is merely the mouthpiece and representative of the Sovereign. Respect shown to the Court is, therefore, respect shown to the Sovereign representative the Judge is. whose
(b) An advocate is like the Judge, himself, an officer of the Court and an integral part of the judicial machine. The legal profession consists of the Bar as well as the Bench and both have common aims and ideals.
(c) Not only litigants and witnesses but the general public will get their inspirations from the example of advocates. It is necessary for the administration of justice that Judges should have esteem of the people. If judges are not respected it tends to impair public confidence in the administration of justice.
(d) It is the good manners and advocates before anything else are "gentlemen of the Bar."
(e) Even from a purely practical standpoint, there is nothing to be gained but there is much to lose by antagonizing the Court. Conflict with the Judge renders the trial disagreeable to all and has generally an injurious effect upon the interests of the client.
(f) The usual practice in modern times is to appoint Judges from among the members of the Bar and even where this rule is not strictly observed the Bench is fairly representative of the Bar.
(g) It is necessary for dignified and honourable administration of justice that the Court should be regarded with respect by the suitors and people. (Para- 173); The State VS Mr. Swadesh Roy. [2 LM (AD) 582]
Contempt of Court Act, 1926
Contempt of Court- We have given our anxious thoughts to the fact that the contemnor has tendered his so-called "unconditional apology" and has suffered eight days in jail. However, we have also to consider that the High Court Division was not satisfied that the apology offered by the contemnor was sufficient to exonerate him completely. We are not in a position to change that view since it is the High Court Division which, found that the contemnor was in contempt of Court...S.O.M Kalimullah =VS= Oxinel Services Pte. Ltd., [10 LM (AD) 432]
Contempt of Court- Sentenced to confinement All elements of grave contempt of court are present in the impugned article. Mr. Swadesh Roy, the writer and Mr. Atiqullah Khan Masud (M.A.Khan Masud), editor, printer and publisher of the Daily Janakantha are found guilty of contempt. The contempt proceeding succeeds. Contemnors Mr. Swadesh Roy (author) and Mr. Mohammad Atiqullah Khan Masud (M.A. Khan Masud) are sentenced to confinement till rising of this Court, this day and to pay a fine of Tk.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each to be contributed to two charitable organizations within one week from date, failing which, they shall suffer seven days simple imprisonment. (Para- 8); The State VS Mr. Swadesh Roy. (2 LM (AD) 576]