Background to the Case

• In July 2011, the Court banned the use of Special Police Officers (SPOs) in any anti-Maoist operations in Chhattisgarh.
• Directed the State to withdraw firearms from SPOs, and instructed the Centre to stop funding the SPO recruitment process.
• Held that such recruitment was a violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution (equality and right to life).

Following the Court’s ruling, Chhattisgarh enacted the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Forces Act, 2011.

• The Act created a new auxiliary force to assist official security forces against Naxal violence.
• It barred deployment in front-line positions and mandated a minimum 6 months of training.
• Only screened and eligible SPOs could be inducted.

• Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: The Act classifies contempt into two categories:
  • Civil Contempt: Wilful disobedience of court orders or undertakings.
  • Criminal Contempt: Any act (spoken, written, or otherwise) that:
    • Scandalises or lowers the authority of the court
    • Prejudices or interferes with judicial proceedings
    • Obstructs the administration of justice in any way
• What is not contempt?
  • Fair and accurate reporting of judicial proceedings.
  • Reasonable and fair criticism of a judicial decision after disposal of the case
• Punishment: 
  • Simple imprisonment up to six months or fine up to ₹2,000, or both.
  • Apology accepted by the court can lead to remission or discharge.

Constitutional Provisions:

• Article 129 & 215: The Powers of Supreme Court and High Court as a court of record which includes the power to punish for contempt of itself.
• Article 142: SC can act to ensure complete justice, including contempt action
• Article 19(2): Contempt is a ground for limiting free speech under Article 19(1).

Important Cases on CoC

• E.M.S. Namboodiripad v. T.N. Nambiar (1970): Kerala CM was convicted of criminal contempt for making derogatory remarks about the judiciary’s class bias, reaffirming limits on free speech.
• Prashant Bhushan Case (2020): SC ruled that Bhushan’s social media posts lowered public trust in the judiciary; imposed a symbolic ₹1 fine.
• Justice C.S. Karnan vs The Honourable Supreme Court Of India(2017): Sitting HC judge was sentenced to 6 months in jail for scandalous allegations against SC judges, marking an unprecedented contempt conviction.
• Re Arundhati Roy (2002): Roy was fined and jailed for a day for scandalising the court in the context of the Narmada Dam case.