Key Terms & Concepts — UPSC Mains
Scandalising the Court
"A form of criminal contempt where a publication or statement is deemed to lower or undermine the authority of a court"
Scandalising the court is a sub-category of criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — defined as any publication or act that 'scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of any court.' This colonial-era doctrine gives courts the power to punish speech or writing that is perceived to undermine public confidence in the judiciary. The offence has been widely criticised as incompatible with modern democratic norms. The UK abolished scandalising contempt in 2013 through the Crime and Courts Act. India's Law Commission, in its 274th Report (2018), also recommended abolishing this offence, noting that robust democracies do not need such protection. The 2006 Amendment to the Act introduced truth as a valid defence, but this has been rarely invoked successfully.
Important for UPSC GS-2 (Judiciary, Freedom of Speech) and Interview. UPSC tests the distinction between civil and criminal contempt, the 2006 Amendment, the Prashant Bhushan case (2020), and the comparative position in the UK (abolition in 2013). The concept raises fundamental questions about judicial accountability, separation of powers, and the limits of free speech.
- 1 Defined under Section 2(c) of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
- 2 Covers publications that scandalise or lower the authority of any court
- 3 UK abolished this offence in 2013 (Crime and Courts Act)
- 4 Law Commission 274th Report (2018) recommended abolition in India
- 5 2006 Amendment added truth as defence — but rarely successfully invoked
The Supreme Court's suo motu action against an NCERT textbook in February 2026 for discussing judicial corruption exemplifies scandalising contempt — the Court banned the book and barred its authors, drawing comparisons to the Prashant Bhushan case (2020) where tweets criticising the CJI attracted a Re. 1 fine.
