Costs ordered in a contempt case do not equate to punishment, making appeals under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 inapplicable for directives imposing costs.

Headnote:(A) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 19 - A Contempt Appeal was filed against an order for costs instead of punishment - The appeal was deemed not maintainable as the directive to pay costs does not constitute a punishment under the Act - The matter was remanded for fresh consideration. (Paras 1-8)

(B) Appeal - The scope of appeal under Section 19 is limited to orders imposing punishment for contempt and does not extend to directives on costs, which are distinct from punishment. (Paras 5, 8)

Facts of the case:
The contempt appeal arises from a complaint of willful disobedience of the court's earlier order, where respondents were directed to pay costs for violation of law.

Findings of Court:
The appeal was dismissed, and the matter was remanded for further consideration due to lack of maintainability.

Issues: Whether the directive to pay costs constitutes a punishable order under the Contempt of Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that costs imposed are not the same as punishment for contempt and therefore, the appeal under Section 19 was not maintainable.

Result: Contempt Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. basis of contempt appeal (Para 1 , 3)
2. consideration of counsel's arguments (Para 2)
3. analysis of maintainability of appeal (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
4. conclusion on appeal dismissal (Para 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT :

Battu Devanand, J.

This Contempt Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 aggrieved by the order, dated 31.12.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in C.C.No.4802 of 2024.

2. Heard Mr C.Raghu, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr B.Sai Sampath Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants on record and perused the material available on record.

3. Complaining willful disobedience of the order, dated 28.03.2023 in W.P.No.24837 of 2021, the petitioner therein filed C.C.No.4802 of 2024 under Sections 10 and 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking to punish the respondents therein for intentional and willful disobedience of the Court order. Having heard the matter in detail, the learned Single Judge of this Court allowed the Contempt Case holding that the respondents are liable for punishment under and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Accordingly, the following order was passed, which is extracted herein under:-

“14. In view of forgoing discussions, Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are liable to pay Rs.2,000/- each as costs for violation of law to be payable in favour of the Member Secretary, Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and after such payment the cost memo shall be filed with the Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati within one (01) week thereafter”.

4. Before going into the merits of this case, we intends to look into the maintainability of this appeal which was filed under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short ‘the Act’). For proper adjudication of this case, of the Act is extracted herein under:-

1) An appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt:-

(a) where the order or decision is that of a single judge, to a Bench of not less than two judges of the Court;

(b) where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court:

Provided that where the order or decision is that of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner in any Union territory, such appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.

2) Pending any appeal, the appellate Court may order that—

(a) the execution of the punishment or order appealed against be suspended;

(b) if the appellant is in confinement, he be released on bail; and (c) the appeal be heard notwithstanding that the appellant has not purged his contempt.

(3) Where any person aggrieved by any order against which an appeal may be filed satisfies the High Court that he intends to prefer an appeal, the High Court may also exercise all or any of the powers conferred by sub-section (2).

(4) An appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed (a) in the case of an appeal to a Bench of the High Court, within thirty days;

(b) in the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court, within sixty days, from the date of the order appealed against.

5. On a bare perusal of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, as extracted herein above, it is clear that an appeal shall lie as of right from any order or decision of the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt. On perusal of the order impugned in the present Contempt Appeal, it is evident that no order of punishment has been imposed. The learned Single Judge of this Court while allowing the Contempt Case directed Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to pay Rs.2,000/-(Rupees Two Thousand only) as costs for violation of law, to be payable in favour of the Member Secretary, Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document