INTRODUCTION
This article deals with the distinction and overlapping of contempt of court and professional misconduct. It also deals with the inappropriate acts and misconduct by advocates, legal consequences and authorities dealing with them. This article will further discuss the role of professional ethics under the Advocates Act 1996 in the Contempt of Court, highlighting the analysis and legal implications.
KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT
The following paragraphs will discuss the major differences in the definition and legal frameworks of contempt of court and professional misconduct. Moreover, it is mentioned that the nature of the offense, punishment and authorities for handling the case are dissimilar.
CONTEMPT OF COURT
Contempt is not specifically defined under the Contempt of Court Act of 1971. However, it only provides two types of contempt: Civil and Criminal Contempt. In general, Contempt of Court refers to disregarding the judiciary’s authority, dignity or functioning.
The Contempt of Court Act of 1971 provides the power to the judicial system to penalise those who disobey the court orders and intervene in justice. Section 12 of the Act of 1971 provides for the punishment of contempt of court which can be in the form of a fine of up to Rs. 2000 and imprisonment of up to six months. Articles 129 and 215 empower the Supreme Court and High Court to punish its contempt. Under Section 10 of the Contempt of Court Act,1971, the High Court have the jurisdiction and authority to punish the Contempt of Courts subordinate to it as well.
Types of Contempt
Contempt can be classified into two categories. These are as follows;
- Civil Contempt – It involves the willful disobedience of court order, decree, or directions by any person including the advocates.
- Criminal Contempt – It involves actions that outrage the court, obstruct the administration of justice, damage reputation or reduce public esteem in the judiciary. Insulting or denigrating a judge, misrepresenting reports about court proceedings, or disrupting courtroom proceedings can be a few examples.
PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT
Violation of ethical misconduct and professional standards for the legal profession by an advocate is known as professional misconduct. It is mainly ruled by the Advocates Act of 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules. Professional Misconduct is an offence punishable by the disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council or the Bar Council of India under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961. The punishments for the advocates found guilty may include Reprimand or warning, temporary suspension from practice, permanent disbarment from the bar association, fines or other penalties determined by the disciplinary committee.
ROLE OF ETHICS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT
An Advocate is considered to be an officer of the court and compliance with the code of conduct laid down by the Advocates Act, ensures the honour of the legal profession.
A code of ethics is to be followed by the Advocates given under Chapter 2 Part V of the Bar Council of India Rules. It provides the rules that deal with the duties of advocates towards the court. It includes:
- Advocates have to maintain a dignified and respectful demeanour towards the judge.
- They should perform their function in a manner that due to their acts the honour and integrity of the court are not affected.
According to Chief Justice Marshall, the fundamental aim of legal ethics is to maintain the honour and dignity of the law profession.
A fundamental question arises, whether criticizing the judge in his capacity amounts to an act, which is against the ethics of the legal profession and scandalizes the authority of the court.
INTERRELATION BETWEEN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT
Contempt of court and professional misconduct can overlap sometimes. If, in case, an advocate engages in contemptuous conduct, such as making baseless allegations against the judiciary, it may also amount to professional misconduct. In such cases, an advocate may face penalties from both the judiciary (for contempt) and the Bar Council (for misconduct).
The Supreme Court held in the case R.K. Anand v. Registrar, Delhi High Court (2009), that an advocate may also face disciplinary action for professional misconduct even if he is guilty of contempt of court. But in the case of Prashant Bhushan (2020), the proceedings for professional misconduct were not initiated by the Bar Council when he was found guilty of criminal contempt for two of his tweets criticizing the court and Chief Justice of India.
CONCLUSION
Both contempt of court and professional misconduct aim to uphold the integrity of the legal system, though they differ in scope, governing laws and enforcement mechanisms. Contempt of Court protects the judiciary’s authority, while professional misconduct ensures that advocates adhere to ethical standards. Legal practitioners must maintain decorum in court and abide by professional ethics to avoid severe legal and professional consequences.
contributed by Kajal Rawat (intern)