Logo

Logo

SC: Court’s power of contempt can’t be taken away by legislative enactment

A bench comprising justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh held the chairperson of an NGO guilty of contempt for not depositing Rs 25 lakh for “scandalizing and browbeating” the apex court.

SC: Court’s power of contempt can’t be taken away by legislative enactment

Supreme Court (Photo: IANS)

The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that the court’s power of contempt cannot be taken away even by legislative enactment.

“We are of the view that the contemnor is clearly guilty of contempt of court and his action to scandalize the court cannot be countenanced,” the top court said.

A bench comprising justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh held the chairperson of an NGO guilty of contempt for not depositing Rs 25 lakh for “scandalizing and browbeating” the apex court.

The bench said the Rajiv Dahiya, chairperson of NGO Suraz India Trust, has been “throwing mud” at all — including the court, administrative staff, and the state government.

Advertisement

It said Dahiya is clearly guilty of contempt of court and added, it cannot approve, his action to scandalize the court.

The top court noted: “The power to punish for contempt is a constitutional power vested with this court which cannot be taken away even by a legislative enactment.”

The apex court has issued notice to Dahiya and directed him to be present on October 7, for a hearing on the sentence. In connection with the recovery of money from Dahiya, the court said it can take place as arrears of land revenue.

The top court had issued contempt notice to Daiya as to why he should not be proceeded against and sentenced for his endeavor to scandalize the court.

Dahiya had told the bench about his inability to pay the cost imposed and cited a lack of resources for the same. Dahiya had submitted before the bench that he would approach the President with a mercy plea.

The top court’s order came on Dahiya’s application seeking recall of its 2017 judgment, where costs of Rs 25 lakh, was imposed on him for filing 64 PILs over the years without any success and “repeatedly misusing” the jurisdiction of the top court.

Advertisement