https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184144 The High Court's contempt jurisdiction over a subordinate court was held not to be barred merely because the same conduct could also amount to an Indian Penal Code offence; the proviso to Section 10 applies only where the act is specifically punishable as contempt under the IPC. The Court further held that Section 15 does not exclude suo motu action in criminal contempt of subordinate courts, and that a summary contempt procedure is valid where the contemners receive notice, an opportunity to respond, and a fair chance to place defence material on record. The convictions for criminal contempt were sustained and the custodial sentences affirmed. en-us Tue, 13 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Jun 2024 10:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184144 The High Court's contempt jurisdiction over a subordinate court was held not to be barred merely because the same conduct could also amount to an Indian Penal Code offence; the proviso to Section 10 applies only where the act is specifically punishable as contempt under the IPC. The Court further held that Section 15 does not exclude suo motu action in criminal contempt of subordinate courts, and that a summary contempt procedure is valid where the contemners receive notice, an opportunity to respond, and a fair chance to place defence material on record. The convictions for criminal contempt were sustained and the custodial sentences affirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184144