Appeal in contempt matters lies only against punishment orders, not refusal to sustain contempt proceedings.

Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 confers an appeal only from an order passed in the exercise of jurisdiction to punish for contempt. Where a contempt petition is dismissed because deliberate or intentional disobedience is not made out, and no punishment under Section 12 is imposed, the order is not appealable under Section 19. The tribunal held that contempt proceedings are between the court and the alleged contemnor, so an appeal does not lie merely because contempt was declined. The dismissal of the contempt petitions was therefore upheld as not maintainable in appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 lies against an order dismissing a contempt petition, where no punishment for contempt has been imposed.

Analysis: Section 19 confers a right of appeal only from an order or decision passed in the exercise of jurisdiction to punish for contempt. The dismissal of a contempt petition on the ground that no deliberate or intentional disobedience was made out is not an order imposing punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The principle applied is that contempt proceedings are primarily between the court or tribunal and the alleged contemnor, and an appeal does not lie merely because contempt was declined or rejected. On a plain reading of the impugned orders, the challenge was only to the refusal to hold the respondents guilty of civil contempt, not to any punitive order.

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and the dismissal of the contempt petitions was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: An appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 lies only against an order imposing punishment for contempt, and not against an order refusing to initiate or sustain contempt proceedings.

---