https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77079 Fair criticism of a judicial or quasi-judicial institution, when based on disclosed facts and not shown to be malicious or distortive, does not constitute criminal contempt. The Court held that the respondent did not breach the prior undertaking because the editorial followed earlier complaints to government functionaries and was based on the same grievances. It also held that the editorial did not scandalize CESTAT or obstruct justice under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Truth was accepted as a defence because the material was treated as factual and in public interest, and the contempt petition was found to be an abuse of process and dismissed with costs. en-us Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77079 Fair criticism of a judicial or quasi-judicial institution, when based on disclosed facts and not shown to be malicious or distortive, does not constitute criminal contempt. The Court held that the respondent did not breach the prior undertaking because the editorial followed earlier complaints to government functionaries and was based on the same grievances. It also held that the editorial did not scandalize CESTAT or obstruct justice under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Truth was accepted as a defence because the material was treated as factual and in public interest, and the contempt petition was found to be an abuse of process and dismissed with costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77079