NDLI: Brahma Prakash Sharma and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	s. 3 1926 Contempt of Courts Act Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	The object of contempt proceedings is not to afford protection - to judges personally from imputations to which they may be exposed as individuals, but is intended to be a protection to the Sharma and public whose interest would be very much affected if, by the act Others or conduct of any party, the authority of the court is lowered and the sense of confidence which the people have in the administration of justice by it is weakened. When the court itself is attacked, the summary jurisdiction by way of contempt ·proceedings must be exercised with scrupulous care and only when the case is clear and beyond reasonable doubt. There are two primary considerations which should weigh with the court in such cases, viz., first, weather the reflection on the conduct or character of the judge is within the limits of fair and reasonable criticism, and secondly, whether it is a mere libel or defamation of the judge or amounts to a contempt of the court. If it is a mere defamatory attack on the judge and is not calculated to interfere with the due course of justice or the proper administration of the law by such court, it is not proper to proceed by way of contempt. Where the question arises whether a defamatory statement directed against a judge is calculated to undermine the confidence of the public in the competency or integrity of the judge or is likely to deflect the court itself from a strict and unhesitant performance of its duties, all the surrounding facts and circumstances under which the statement was made and the degree of publicity that was given to it would be relevant circumstances. The c1uestion is not to be determined solely with reference to the' language or contents of the statement made. The Executive Committee of a District Bar Association received several complaints against the way in which the Judicial Magistrate and the Revenue Officer of the District disposed of cases and behaved towards litigants and lawyers, and passed a resolution which stated that ''it was their considered opinion that the two officers are thoroughly incompetent in law, do not inspire confidence in their judicial work, and given to stating wrong facts when passing orders and are overbearing and discourteous to the litigant public and lawyers alike" and gave a list of various complaints against the officers. This resolution was passed in camera, typed out by the President himself and forwarded confidentially to the District Magistrate. Commissioner of the Division, and the Chief Secretary and Premier of the State. The District Magistrate moved the High Court of Allahabad to take action against the appellants, who had passed the resolution, for contempt of court. The High Court held that the appellants were guilty of contempt, but accepted their apology. On appeal: Held, that in the light of all the circumstances of the case, the contempt, if any, was only of a technical character and that after the affidavits" bad been filed on behalf of the appellants before the High Court, the proceedings against them should have been dropped.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Bijan Kumar Mukherjea
Neutral Citation	1953 INSC 43
Petitioner	Brahma Prakash Sharma And Others
Respondent	The State Of Uttar Pradesh
SCR	[1953] 1 S.C.R. 1169
Judgement Date	1953-05-08
Case Number	24

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Brahma Prakash Sharma and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Brahma Datt Sharma and Anr.

State of Uttaranchal Thru. Secretary Vs. Sehnaz Mirza & Ors.

Om Prakash and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Meenal Bhargava Vs. Naveen Sharma

Rizwan-ul-hasan and Another Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Raja Anand Brahma Shah

Kaptan Singh Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

Ram Partap Sharma and Ors. Vs. Daya Nand and Ors.

Hari Prakash Shukla & Ors. Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

Brahma Prakash Sharma and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Brahma Prakash Sharma and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Brahma Datt Sharma and Anr.

State of Uttaranchal Thru. Secretary Vs. Sehnaz Mirza & Ors.

Om Prakash and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Meenal Bhargava Vs. Naveen Sharma

Rizwan-ul-hasan and Another Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Raja Anand Brahma Shah

Kaptan Singh Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Others

Ram Partap Sharma and Ors. Vs. Daya Nand and Ors.

Hari Prakash Shukla & Ors. Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

Brahma Prakash Sharma and Others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh