https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456743 A deliberate letter sent to a judge seized of a pending matter, alleging unlawful conduct and attacking judicial impartiality, was held to constitute contempt because it directly threatened the administration of justice. A belated apology was treated as mitigating only on sentence: it was not frank or timely enough to wipe out liability, though it helped avoid imprisonment. The statutory bar in Section 2(3) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 was held inapplicable because it did not extend to the kind of contempt under consideration. The reference succeeded, contempt was affirmed, and punishment was imposed by fine. en-us Tue, 20 Sep 1938 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:48:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456743 A deliberate letter sent to a judge seized of a pending matter, alleging unlawful conduct and attacking judicial impartiality, was held to constitute contempt because it directly threatened the administration of justice. A belated apology was treated as mitigating only on sentence: it was not frank or timely enough to wipe out liability, though it helped avoid imprisonment. The statutory bar in Section 2(3) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926 was held inapplicable because it did not extend to the kind of contempt under consideration. The reference succeeded, contempt was affirmed, and punishment was imposed by fine. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 20 Sep 1938 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456743