https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280420 Criminal contempt requires a clear factual foundation showing which judicial direction was violated and how; a bare allegation of disobedience is insufficient. The text notes the distinction between civil contempt and criminal contempt, and states that the earlier Full Bench view upholding the notification making the offence cognizable and non-bailable prevailed over the contrary Division Bench view. Because the petition did not specify which D. K. Basu direction had been breached or the manner of breach, the matter did not disclose a case for criminal contempt, and the procedure under Section 15 was not attracted on the pleadings made. The contempt petition was dismissed. en-us Tue, 25 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 May 2019 12:48:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280420 Criminal contempt requires a clear factual foundation showing which judicial direction was violated and how; a bare allegation of disobedience is insufficient. The text notes the distinction between civil contempt and criminal contempt, and states that the earlier Full Bench view upholding the notification making the offence cognizable and non-bailable prevailed over the contrary Division Bench view. Because the petition did not specify which D. K. Basu direction had been breached or the manner of breach, the matter did not disclose a case for criminal contempt, and the procedure under Section 15 was not attracted on the pleadings made. The contempt petition was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 25 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280420