Contempt Jurisdiction Is Independent, Civil Contempt Petitions Need Not Be Placed Before Same Bench Which Passed Original Order: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court has ordered that it is not necessary to always place a civil contempt petition before the same Bench which passed the order against which the contempt petition was filed. Currently, this is the practice being followed by the High Court.The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S. Manu was deciding on a suo motu petition placed before it by...
The Kerala High Court has ordered that it is not necessary to always place a civil contempt petition before the same Bench which passed the order against which the contempt petition was filed. Currently, this is the practice being followed by the High Court.
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice S. Manu was deciding on a suo motu petition placed before it by the Registry in the aftermath of another Division Bench order of the Court. The court said:
"Contempt jurisdiction is an independent jurisdiction. The placement of the Contempt Petition is a part of the fixation of the Roster. This being the position of law, the present practice which as pointed out by the Registry causes unnecessary delay and inconvenience, is not only not traceable to any Rule but, in fact, is contrary to the above legal position."
The Bench noted that this practice was causing delays in listing contempt cases when the Judge/ one of the Judges who passed the order retired or both Judges of the Division Bench were sitting in different benches after changes in the roster.
As of now, a special bench is constituted outside the current roster to hear such contempt matters. The Registry pointed out that such a procedure causes delay and affects the regular functioning of the Court.
The High Court ordered that the current procedure need not be followed. It said that the contempt petition can be placed before the Bench against whom the main matter is pending or before whom the main matter would lie as per the Roster if it were pending. This will apply to petition for contempt for disobedience of interim as well as final orders.
The Court relied on the Supreme Court decision in High Court of Judicature in Allahad through its Registrar v Raj Kishore and Others (1997).
In that case, the Court held that the contempt alleged is contempt of the High Court and not necessarily the contempt of the Judge who authored the original order. The Apex Court said that contempt jurisdiction is unlike review jurisdiction where the matters have to be placed before the same Bench as per law. The Supreme Court said that contempt is a jurisdiction of original nature and can be placed before any bench as per the Rules framed by the administrative side of the High Court.
Case No: JPP 2/ 2024
Case Title: Suo Motu v State of Kerala and Another
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 98