In short :
The Supreme Court has clarified that enacting a law—whether by Parliament or a State Legislature—cannot be treated as contempt of court, even if it appears contrary to a judicial ruling.
Key Takeaways from the Judgement :
Context: The case pertained to a 2012 contempt plea over Chhattisgarh’s law allegedly violating the SC’s 2011 judgment banning arming of tribals as SPOs (Salwa Judum case).
Court’s Stand:
- Enacting a law is part of the plenary powers of the legislature.
- Contempt proceedings are not applicable just because a new law seems contrary to a judgment.
- The appropriate remedy is challenging the constitutional validity of such a law.
- Reaffirmed Separation of Powers — legislatures can make laws that override judgments, provided they don’t violate the Constitution.
Contempt of Court
Constitutional Provisions:
- Article 129 – SC’s power to punish for its own contempt.
- Article 215 – HC’s power to punish for contempt.
- Article 19(2) – Permits reasonable restrictions on free speech in the interest of contempt.
Types of Contempt:
- Civil – Willful disobedience of court orders.
- Criminal – Acts that scandalise the court or obstruct justice.
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971:
- Defines contempt.
- 2006 Amendment – Allows truth and good faith as defences.
- Punishment: Upto 6 months in jail or ₹2,000 fine or both.
| UPSC Relevance : GS2 – Polity & Judiciary Mains Practice Question : “Can enacting a law be treated as contempt of court? Discuss in light of the doctrine of separation of powers.” |