<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (5) TMI 1123 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298853</link>
    <description>Unconditional apology in criminal contempt may be accepted where it is bona fide and satisfies the Court under the proviso and Explanation to Section 12(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; acceptance remains exceptional, not routine. The Court treated the conduct as grave interference with the administration of justice and inconsistent with an advocate&#039;s duty to the court, but also considered repeated affidavits of unconditional apology, earlier apologies before the Magistrate and High Court, and an assurance of future good conduct. On that basis, the apology was accepted and the appellants were discharged from the contempt finding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2023 17:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=661845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 1123 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298853</link>
      <description>Unconditional apology in criminal contempt may be accepted where it is bona fide and satisfies the Court under the proviso and Explanation to Section 12(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; acceptance remains exceptional, not routine. The Court treated the conduct as grave interference with the administration of justice and inconsistent with an advocate&#039;s duty to the court, but also considered repeated affidavits of unconditional apology, earlier apologies before the Magistrate and High Court, and an assurance of future good conduct. On that basis, the apology was accepted and the appellants were discharged from the contempt finding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298853</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>