https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185445 Defamatory criticism of a judge amounts to contempt only where, in its content and manner of publication, it is calculated or likely to interfere with the due administration of justice or undermine public confidence in the courts. The power to punish for contempt is directed to preserving the administration of justice, not protecting judges from personal criticism. Fair, reasonable and bona fide criticism of judicial acts is permissible, and the surrounding circumstances, including limited publication and the genuineness of the complaint, are relevant in assessing any tendency to obstruct justice. On that basis, the appellants' conduct was not contemptuous; at most it was technical, and the contempt finding was set aside. en-us Fri, 08 May 1953 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:43:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185445 Defamatory criticism of a judge amounts to contempt only where, in its content and manner of publication, it is calculated or likely to interfere with the due administration of justice or undermine public confidence in the courts. The power to punish for contempt is directed to preserving the administration of justice, not protecting judges from personal criticism. Fair, reasonable and bona fide criticism of judicial acts is permissible, and the surrounding circumstances, including limited publication and the genuineness of the complaint, are relevant in assessing any tendency to obstruct justice. On that basis, the appellants' conduct was not contemptuous; at most it was technical, and the contempt finding was set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 08 May 1953 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185445