Article 129 of CoI : Article 129: Supreme Court to be a court of record.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Scenario: A journalist publishes an article alleging that a Supreme Court judge has taken a bribe to influence a case decision. The article is widely circulated and damages the reputation of the judiciary.

Application of Article 129: The Supreme Court, being a court of record, takes suo motu cognizance of the matter and initiates contempt proceedings against the journalist. The Court has the power to summon the journalist, conduct a hearing, and if found guilty, punish the journalist for contempt of court. This could include fines or imprisonment, depending on the severity of the contempt.

Example 2:

Scenario: During a high-profile case, a lawyer repeatedly disobeys the Supreme Court's orders and makes derogatory remarks about the judges in open court.

Application of Article 129: The Supreme Court, exercising its power as a court of record, initiates contempt proceedings against the lawyer. The Court holds a hearing to determine whether the lawyer's actions constitute contempt. If the lawyer is found guilty, the Supreme Court can impose sanctions, which may include suspension of the lawyer's license to practice, fines, or imprisonment.

Example 3:

Scenario: A citizen files a petition in the Supreme Court challenging a government policy. During the proceedings, the citizen makes false statements and submits forged documents to the Court.

Application of Article 129: The Supreme Court, as a court of record, identifies the false statements and forged documents. The Court initiates contempt proceedings against the citizen for attempting to mislead the Court and obstruct the course of justice. If found guilty, the citizen could face penalties such as fines or imprisonment, as determined by the Court.

Example 4:

Scenario: A social media influencer posts a video criticizing a Supreme Court judgment and uses offensive language against the judges.

Application of Article 129: The Supreme Court, recognizing the potential impact of the video on public perception of the judiciary, initiates contempt proceedings against the influencer. The Court conducts a hearing to assess whether the content of the video constitutes contempt. If the influencer is found guilty, the Court can impose penalties, including fines or imprisonment, to uphold the dignity and authority of the judiciary.