IN RE : SHRI S. MULGAOKAR versus --
Contempt proceedings are discretionary and should not be lightly initiated; criticism must cross the threshold of malicious intent or gross distortion to justify contempt, and in the present case, proceedings were dropped without any finding against individuals.
- Parties
- Alleged Contemner: Shri S. Mulgaokar; Solicitor General: S. N. Kacker; Intervener: Dr. L. M. Singhvi
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 21 February 1978
- Procedural Posture
- Original Jurisdiction / Order on Contempt Proceedings
- Outcome
- Proceedings dropped
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Press, Judicial Criticism
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Shri S. Mulgaokar
Alleged Contemner
S. N. Kacker
Solicitor General
Dr. L. M. Singhvi
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Original Jurisdiction / Order on Contempt Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the publication of newspaper articles criticizing Supreme Court judges amounts to contempt of court
- 2 Tests for determining contempt of court in relation to press coverage
Ratio Decidendi
Contempt proceedings are discretionary and should not be lightly initiated; criticism must cross the threshold of malicious intent or gross distortion to justify contempt, and in the present case, proceedings were dropped without any finding against individuals.
Court Disposition
Proceedings dropped
Orders
- Contempt proceedings dropped without any finding against individuals
- Contempt proceedings were dropped without calling upon the counsel for the respondents
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment