Question map
Consider the following statements : 1. Pursuant to the report of H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed. 2. The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves. 3. The Constitution of India defines Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt. 4. In India, the Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of Court. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
Explanation
The correct answer is Option 2 (1, 2 and 4) based on the following constitutional and legal provisions:
- Statement 1 is correct: The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was enacted based on the recommendations of the H.N. Sanyal Committee, which examined the law relating to contempt to bring it in line with constitutional requirements.
- Statement 2 is correct: Under Article 129 (for the Supreme Court) and Article 215 (for High Courts), the Constitution explicitly designates them as "Courts of Record" with the inherent power to punish for contempt of themselves.
- Statement 4 is correct: The Parliament has the power to legislate on "Contempt of Court" under Entry 77 of the Union List and Entry 14 of the Concurrent List.
- Statement 3 is incorrect: The Constitution does not define Civil or Criminal Contempt. These terms are defined under Section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Guest previewThis is a classic 'Static Polity' question solvable entirely from standard texts like Laxmikanth. It relies on the recurring 'Definition Trap'âclaiming the Constitution defines a term when it is actually defined by a Statute. If you spot that Statement 3 is false (Constitution does not define Civil/Criminal contempt), the answer becomes obvious.
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Statement 1: Was the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 enacted in India pursuant to the report of the H.N. Sanyal Committee on contempt of courts?
- Statement 2: Does the Constitution of India empower the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves in matters of contempt of courts in India?
- Statement 3: Does the Constitution of India define the legal categories "civil contempt" and "criminal contempt" in relation to contempt of courts in India?
- Statement 4: Is the Parliament of India constitutionally vested with the power to make laws on contempt of courts in India?
- Explicitly states the committee submitted its report in 1963.
- Says the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was enacted by Parliament based on the committee's recommendations.
- Also describes the Act's classification of contempt (civil or criminal), linking the law to the committee's remit.
- Repeats that the committee's report led to the enactment of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
- Provides supporting detail on the Act (definition of civil contempt and penalties), reinforcing the connection to the committee's recommendations.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This statement analysis shows book citations, web sources and indirect clues. The first statement (S1) is open for preview.
Login with Google to unlock all statements.
This tab shows concrete study steps: what to underline in books, how to map current affairs, and how to prepare for similar questions.
Login with Google to unlock study guidance.
Discover the small, exam-centric ideas hidden in this question and where they appear in your books and notes.
Login with Google to unlock micro-concepts.
Access hidden traps, elimination shortcuts, and Mains connections that give you an edge on every question.
Login with Google to unlock The Vault.