In Vineeta Srinandan v. High Court of Judicature At Bombay On Its Own Motion [2025 INSC 1408], the Supreme Court reiterated that the power to punish for contempt is not a tool to silence critics or shield judges from scrutiny. It declared that contempt jurisdiction must never become a personal armour for the judiciary.
The Supreme Court added that the power to punish necessarily carries within it the concomitant power to forgive, if the individual before the Court demonstrates genuine remorse and repentance for the act that has brought him to this position. Therefore, mercy must remain an integral part of the judicial conscience, to be extended where the contemnor sincerely acknowledges his lapse and seeks to atone for it.
The Supreme Court was hearing an appeal under Section 19(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, challenging the Bombay High Court’s order convicting the appellant for criminal contempt, sentencing her to one week’s simple imprisonment and a fine of ₹2,000.
The Supreme Court observed in the judgement that in the absence of any material suggesting that the apology was lacking in bona fides, the High Court ought to have considered remitting the sentence in accordance with law.
