1979 (3) TMI 217 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against conviction for civil contempt and sentencing to imprisonment.
- Violation of undertaking given to the Court.
- Appropriate sentence for civil contempt.

Analysis:

The judgment concerns an appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act against a High Court order convicting the appellants for civil contempt and sentencing them to one month's simple imprisonment. The case originated from a loan transaction where the appellants failed to repay the loan as per the agreed terms, leading to a complaint under Section 420 IPC. Subsequently, the parties reached a compromise, and the appellants undertook to repay the loan with interest by a specified date. However, the appellants violated this undertaking, prompting the respondent to move the High Court for contempt proceedings. The High Court found the appellants guilty of wilful disobedience of the court's order based on the violated undertaking, leading to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.

The appellant's counsel argued two main points before the Supreme Court. Firstly, it was contended that while the appellants violated the undertaking, it was not a wilful disobedience of the court's order. However, the Supreme Court agreed with the High Court's finding that the appellants had indeed committed wilful disobedience by breaching the undertaking that formed the basis of their acquittal. Secondly, the appellant's counsel raised the issue of the appropriate sentence for civil contempt under Section 12(3) of the Act, arguing that imprisonment should only be imposed in exceptional circumstances where a fine would not suffice. The Supreme Court concurred with this argument, emphasizing that imprisonment should be an exception rather than the rule, and should be imposed only when necessary for the ends of justice.

Considering the specific circumstances of the case and the absence of the respondent to support the imprisonment sentence, the Supreme Court concluded that the appellants should not be sent to jail. Instead, the Court set aside the High Court's sentence of imprisonment and directed the appellants to pay a fine of Rs. 1000 each, with a provision of 15 days simple imprisonment in case of default. The appellants were granted four weeks to pay the fine, thereby modifying the sentence to align with the principles of justice and the statutory provisions governing civil contempt.