​The Calcutta High Court has recently expressed serious concern over the initiation of contempt proceedings by a trial court, despite an existing stay order issued by the High Court. This development has drawn attention to the potential overreach of subordinate courts and the importance of adhering to higher court directives.​

In a notable case, the Supreme Court intervened after the Calcutta High Court desisted from exercising its contempt jurisdiction, despite finding the contemnor guilty of willfully violating a stay order. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order, emphasizing that the High Court had transgressed the scope of its contempt jurisdiction by vacating the stay order instead of initiating appropriate contempt proceedings .​

This incident underscores the critical need for trial courts to respect and adhere to the orders of higher courts. The Calcutta High Court’s expression of despair highlights concerns about the autonomy of higher judiciary decisions and the potential undermining of judicial authority when lower courts initiate proceedings that contradict established orders.​

Legal experts and judicial authorities have called for a review of such practices to ensure that the hierarchy of courts is maintained and that contempt proceedings are initiated appropriately, in line with higher court directives.

Sources