Confusion over 'Contempt'
What is 'Contempt of Court'? Contempt of Court is so manifold in its aspect that it is really difficult to lay down any exact definition of the offence. A person can be held on contempt if his mucky hand touches the pure fountain of justice that is, inter alia, by scandalising the Court itself, or by abusing parties to actions, or by prejudicing mankind in favour of or against a party before the cause is heard. Lord Chancellor Hardwicke said 'there cannot be anything of greater consequence than to keep the streams of justice clear and pure ……'. This happens when someone acts or writes to bring a court or a judge into contempt or to lower his authority or to interfere with the continuity of the crystal clear flow of the stream of justice or the lawful process of the Court.
However, under no circumstance contempt proceeding should be drawn up against someone for criticising the judicial authority, in good faith, for corruption and inefficiency. The object of contempt proceeding is not to afford protection of judge personally from imputations from which they may be exposed as individuals. Blackburn J said "The phrase 'contempt of court' often misleads persons not lawyers, and causes them to misapprehend its meaning and to suppose that a proceeding for contempt of court amounts to some process taken for the purpose of vindicating that personal dignity of the Judges, and protecting them from personal insults as individuals. Very often it happens that contempt is committed by a personal attack on a Judge or an insult offered to him; but as far as their dignity as individuals is concerned, it is of very subordinate importance compared with the vindication of the dignity of the Court itself...."

The issue to be addressed
As a last resort people beg before the Court but do they get justice? A Court can put you behind the bar and take away your freedom and human rights, it can hang you to death and take away your precious life, it can evict you from your home, and it also can takeaway your children and give it to someone else. It can keep police officials standing for hours for not saluting its flag. The Court can also issue a suo moto Rule Nisi calling upon an editor and reporter to explain as to why contempt proceeding should not be drawn up against them for publishing a particular news item even though there were other pressing issues which escaped their Lordships kind attention. Actually anything and everything their lordships may deem fit and proper can be ordered by the Court. And for these acts of kindnesses, as in duty bound, we always pray before the learned and honourable Court.
Judges are hardly accountable to anyone but, well to some extent, to themselves. However, if you are aggrieved by a decision of Appellate Division of the Supreme Court you are stuck.
Given that judges hold such enormous powers there is hardly any information general people know about these learned and honourable people and their activities. People possess wrong notion about 'Contempt of Court'. Like the other two main institutions people deserves to know how judiciary is handling their cases. They also deserve to know whether there is any room from improvement to set up a modern and effective judiciary. There is hardly any writing or discussion about a particular judgement. Considering the time and cost involved in the justice system if someone fails to appeal against a decision of the court, which may be was an erroneous one, it will remain buried as a flawed decision. If the same is reported in any 'law decision book' one might even tried to take advantage by citing or submitting that flawed judgement before the Court. One must not forget judges are also human being and to err is human. So it is obviously possible for any judge to come to a conclusion, which was erroneous, and a reasonable observation or comment on it cannot amount to 'contempt of court' unless the matter is sub-judice.
Contempt proceedings should only be drawn up only when there is extremely strong reason for doing so. Post-mortem report of a judgement would not only enlighten the general people of this country about a case but the same would also be a good reading stuff for the law students and other judges alike and would certainly avoid any future miscarriage of judgement. People deserve to know whether the judges reasonably applied their judicial mind when they exercised their discretionary powers given under the law.
A judgement not only should decide the case before the Court but may also approve or overfull older decisions if it respectively agrees and does not agree with the previous one under the 'doctrine of precedent'. Different decision on a single 'point of law' given by the two benches or courts of the same tier could put the lawyers in trouble when advising their clients. To avoid any confusion we need some kind of mechanism to monitor court activities. An academician could help the judiciary by speaking out in good faith about a judgement and comparing with other decisions by using prudent knowledge they certainly possess. How come there is hardly any discussion or criticism about the judiciary and its decisions unless any valid reason of not doing so. The answer isthe fear of 'contempt of court' proceedings.

Concluding remarks
Recent protests and writings about the supersessions, in the High Court Division, were really deserves appreciation. Citizen of this country are in dark about the judiciary as no one wants to find himself before the court with a contempt proceedings hanging over their head. Actually people are scared about the judiciary and the fear of being getting caught in the trap always remain active in the back of their head before uttering a word about the judiciary.

Barrister M. Moksadul Islam is an Advocate of Supreme Court.