 bill no 158 of  2015 the contempt of courts (amendment) bill, 2015 byshri jagdambika pal, mp a billfurther to amend the contempt of courts act, 1971be it enacted by parliament in the sixty-sixth year of the republic of  india as follows:—7 of 1971amendment of section 252 in section 2 of the contempt of courts act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the principal act), in clause (c), in sub-clause (i), for the words "scandalises or tends to scandalise", the words "scandalises or tends to scandlise to the extent that it undermine or tends to undermine the administration of justice or public confidence therein" shall be substituteda m e n d m e n t of  section 133 in section 13 of the principal act, for clause (a), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:—10" (a) no court shall impose a sentence under this act for a contempt of court unless it is satisfied that there is a mala fide intention and a real, clear and imminent danger to discredit the  administration of justice or the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends substantially to interfere with the due course of justice" statement of objects and reasonsright to freedom of speech and expression is one of the most important fundamental rights of the citizens which is essential for any vibrant democracy the founding fathers of indian constitution undoubtedly considered free speech as one of the most basic rights, essential for safeguarding and promoting other human rights while providing for right to free speech under article 19(1)(a) of the constitution, certain reasonable restrictions have been laid down under article 19(2) article 19(2) of the constitution includes "contempt of courts" as one of the limitations on free speech this provision has been provided to ensure that citizens do not lose their faith in the judiciary if disrespectful or critical statements are made about the courtsthe pending cases pertaining to contempt in the apex court accounts for 158 per centwith conviction rate over 588 per cent of the cases in this category several democratic countries including the united states of america, have narrowly circumscribed the doctrine of contempt however, in india a rather broad use of contempt has been permitted leading to curbing of the right to free speech and expression provided in the constitutionin section 2(c) of the contempt of courts act, the phrase "scandalizes or tends to scandalize" is neither defined nor any guidelines have been laid down for its interpretation this phrase is so wide and vague that there is high probability of its misuse leading to chilling effects on the citizens' right of free speech and expression while criticising the verdict of any court the supreme court has observed "a penal law is void for vagueness if it fails to define the criminal offence with sufficient definiteness ordinary people should be able to understand what conduct is prohibited and what is permitted"in case of kartar singh v state of punjab, (1994) 3 scc 569, it was held "vague laws offend several important values it is insisted or emphasized that laws should give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly vague laws may trap the innocent by not providing fair warning" hence, it is pertinent to define the term clearly to make a distinction from the other phrases used in the definition section of the actevery citizen should have right to criticise in good faith, even the acts of the court as long as citizens exercise right of free speech which criticise acts of courts without any mala fide intention to impair the administration of justice, they should not be held in contemptmoreover, public interest can be maintained by ensuring fair trial and reposing faith in the judiciary while balancing the freedom of speech appropriately thus, it is necessary to remove the scope of any vagueness from the expression "criminal contempt" as defined in the contempt of courts act, 1971hence this billnew delhi;jagdambika palapril 9, 2015 annexure extract from the contempt of courts act, 1971 (70 of 1971)    definitions2 in this act, unless the context otherwise requires,—$(a)^{\,\!}$$\approx$$(b)^{\,\!}$$\approx$$(b)^{\,\!}$$\approx$$(b)^{\,\!}$$\approx$$(b)^{\,\!}$$\approx$$(b)^{\,\!}$$\approx$\((b)^{\,\!(c) "criminal contempt" means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which—(i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or   13 notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force,—contempt not punishable in certain acts(a) no court shall impose a sentence under this act for a contempt of court unless it is satisfied that the contempt is of such a nature that it substantially interferes, or tends substantially with the due course of justice [10] m c gonzalez-garcia, m c gonzalez-garcia, m——— a billfurther to amend the contempt of courts act, 1971————(shri jagdambika pal, mp)gmgipmrnd—1270ls—14072015