Law Commission’s Stand

♤ According to 274th Law Commission Report no changes are required to the 1971 statute.

♤ There are several safeguards built into the Act to protect against its misuse. For instance, the Act contains provisions which lays down cases that do not amount to contempt and cases where contempt is not punishable. These provisions suggest that the courts will not prosecute all cases of contempt.

♤ The Commission further noted that the Act had withstood judicial scrutiny, and therefore, there was no reason to amend it. In fact, the statute, by laying down procedure, restricts the vast authority of the courts in wielding contempt powers.

♤ Amending the definition of contempt will lead to ambiguity. This is because the superior courts will continue to exercise contempt powers under the Constitution. If there is no definition for criminal contempt in the Act, superior courts may give multiple definitions and interpretations to what constitutes contempt.

♤ Even in the absence of the legislation, the Courts have the power to punish for their contempt under the constitution as the Act 1971 is not the source of ‘power to punish for contempt’ but a procedural statute that guides the enforcement and regulation of such power.