{"id":204070,"date":"2018-10-22T19:00:48","date_gmt":"2018-10-22T13:30:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=204070"},"modified":"2018-10-25T17:11:15","modified_gmt":"2018-10-25T11:41:15","slug":"mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/","title":{"rendered":"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of Singapore: <\/strong>A Single Judge Bench of Woo Bih Li, J., allowed the summons filed by the petitioner, whereby petitioner sought to convict the respondents under Section 3(1)(a) of the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016 for the offence of scandalizing contempt.<\/p>\n

The respondents had posted some alleged scandalizing remarks against the judiciary which according to them was a fair criticism and hence protected under Article 14 of the Constitution of Singapore which is the supreme law of the land. The respondents further challenged the constitutional validity of Section 3(1)(a) of the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016.<\/p>\n

The main issue that arose before the Court was whether Section 3(1)(a) of the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016 is unconstitutional and whether the respondents were actually liable for scandalizing contempt.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the \u201crisk\u201d test laid down under Section 3(1)(a) needs to be satisfied in order to charge a person for scandalizing contempt. The actions or words of the accused should be such that there surfaces a risk of loss of public confidence in the administration of justice. The Court further observed that this risk test is not a new concept and it used to prevail even before the 2016 Act came into force. Earlier the test under common law which was used in order to assess the conduct of a person for contempt was a \u201creal risk\u201d test. The approach of both the tests is same i.e. a question needs to be asked as to whether the conduct in question poses a risk that public confidence in the administration of justice would be undermined? This question needs to be answered objectively from an average rational person\u2019s point of view.<\/p>\n

The Court held that the \u201crisk\u201d test is a permissible restriction under Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution of Singapore. There is a direct nexus between the object of Section 3(1)(a) of the 2016 Act and the permissible restrictions given under Article 14(2) of the Constitution. The Court further held that the offence of scandalizing contempt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and mens rea <\/em>is immaterial while charging a person for the offence under Section 3(1)(a) of the 2016 Act. The Court concluded by holding that fair criticism does not amount to scandalizing contempt and the accused can seek protection under the blanket of fair criticism but in the instant case, the actions of the respondents cannot be brought under the concept of fair criticism. The Court held the respondents are liable for the offence of scandalizing contempt under Section 3(1)(a) of the 2016 Act. [Attorney General v. Wham Kwok Han Jolovan, (2018) SGHC 222, order dated 09-10-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of Singapore: A Single Judge Bench of Woo Bih Li, J., allowed the summons filed by the petitioner, whereby petitioner <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":204071,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[7381,32172,32173],"class_list":["post-204070","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-administration-of-justice","tag-risk-test","tag-scandalizing-contempt"],"yoast_head":"\nMens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court of Singapore: A Single Judge Bench of Woo Bih Li, J., allowed the summons filed by the petitioner, whereby petitioner\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-10-22T13:30:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-25T11:41:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"880\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/\",\"name\":\"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-10-22T13:30:48+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-25T11:41:15+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":880,\"caption\":\"SC Singapore\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016","og_description":"Supreme Court of Singapore: A Single Judge Bench of Woo Bih Li, J., allowed the summons filed by the petitioner, whereby petitioner","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-10-22T13:30:48+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-25T11:41:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":880,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/","name":"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg","datePublished":"2018-10-22T13:30:48+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-25T11:41:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg","width":1330,"height":880,"caption":"SC Singapore"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/mens-rea-immaterial-in-determining-liability-for-the-offence-of-scandalizing-contempt-under-the-provisions-of-administration-of-justice-protection-act-2016\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mens rea immaterial in determining liability for the offence of \u201cscandalizing contempt\u201d under the provisions of Administration of Justice (Protection) Act, 2016"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/SupremeCourtBuilding-Singapore-20070210.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":6633,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/05\/28\/advocate-held-guilty-for-criminal-contempt-of-court-for-making-wild-allegations-against-the-chief-justice\/","url_meta":{"origin":204070,"position":0},"title":"Advocate held guilty for criminal contempt of Court for making wild allegations against the Chief Justice","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 28, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: While deciding the present contempt petition, where the contemnor via a Notice to the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India, had leveled serious allegations upon the present Chief Justice of this Court, the Division Bench of Sudhir Agarwal and Dinesh Gupta, JJ., held the contemnor\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "High Courts"","block_context":{"text":"High Courts","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/highcourts\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6243,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/08\/06\/2-decade-old-contempt-petition-closed\/","url_meta":{"origin":204070,"position":1},"title":"2 decade old contempt petition closed","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 6, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Ordering closure of two decade old contempt petition filed in 1994 against certain bigwigs of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the publishers and reporters of Indian Express and Khabardar India, the Constitution Bench comprising R.M Lodha, CJ. and A.R Dave, S.J Mukhopadhaya, Dipak Misra and S.K Singh, JJ.,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Supreme Court"","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":325856,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/06\/punjab-and-haryana-hc-drops-criminal-contempt-proceedings-against-a-man-for-his-pleadings-against-a-judge\/","url_meta":{"origin":204070,"position":2},"title":"\u2018Healthy and constructive criticism should always be welcome\u2019; Punjab and Haryana HC drops criminal contempt proceedings against a man for his pleadings against a Judge","author":"Arushi","date":"July 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court stated that the contempt jurisdiction should not be exercised lightly at the drop of a hat. It ought to be invoked only in rare or exceptional cases where there is interference with administration of justice or such action amounts to scandalizing or lowering the authority of the Court.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Punjab and Haryana High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Punjab-and-Haryana-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":321969,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/13\/contempt-of-court-mp-high-court-imposes-a%c2%b91-lakh-cost-on-news-editor-for-vilification-of-a-sitting-judge-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":204070,"position":3},"title":"Contempt of Court | MP High Court imposes \u20b91 lakh cost on news editor for vilification of a sitting judge in a 2011 news report","author":"Ritu","date":"May 13, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court stated that despite opportunities, the respondent failed to offer a genuine apology or show remorse for his actions.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":288200,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/30\/madras-high-court-orders-disciplinary-action-against-deputy-secretary-law-department-for-unruly-behavior-in-court-premises-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":204070,"position":4},"title":"Madras High Court orders disciplinary action against Deputy Secretary, Law Department for unruly behavior in Court premises","author":"Editor","date":"March 30, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Ruckus and unruly behavior inside the Court amounts to scandalizing and lowering the authority of the Madras High Court, as well as interfering and obstructing with the administration of justice.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madras High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-455.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-455.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-455.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-455.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269568,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/05\/power-of-contempt-divine-origin-colonial-evolution-and-judicial-devolution\/","url_meta":{"origin":204070,"position":5},"title":"Power of Contempt: Divine Origin, Colonial Evolution, and Judicial Devolution","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Shubham Priyadarshi*","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"by Shubham Priyadarshi","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/OpEd_by_Shubham_Priyadarshi.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/OpEd_by_Shubham_Priyadarshi.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/OpEd_by_Shubham_Priyadarshi.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/OpEd_by_Shubham_Priyadarshi.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/OpEd_by_Shubham_Priyadarshi.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204070","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=204070"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204070\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/204071"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204070"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204070"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204070"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}