NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has held that the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) does not possess independent powers to punish for contempt arising from non-compliance of its final orders.
A bench of justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla passed the order on a petition filed by the Union of India challenging a judgement passed by the tribunal, which had held that wilful non-implementation of AFT orders could amount to contempt.
The bench noted that the tribunal’s power could be exercised only in cases involving insulting or threatening language or acts that cause interruption or disturbance in the proceedings there.
“Mere non-compliance with a final order, even if wilful, does not fall within this statutory framework,” the HC said.
The court, however, noted that the absence of civil contempt powers in the armed forces tribunal does not render its final orders toothless.
“Non-compliance with final AFT orders would attract the contempt jurisdiction of the HC under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, treating the AFT as a judicial body whose orders cannot be allowed to go unenforced,” the bench said, noting that over 5,600 AFT orders remained unimplemented at the time of the tribunal’s reference.
The bench also noted that the law recognises the inherent authority of the AFT to issue directions “necessary to give effect to its orders or to secure the ends of justice”.
“These inherent powers are wide and may extend to measures such as service-related consequences or action against assets, but cannot include incarceration or punishment akin to civil contempt, which would offend Article 21 (right to life and liberty) of the Constitution in the absence of statutory sanction,” the high court bench said.
Also in court
Unauthorised use of name, voice of Nautiyal barred
The Delhi High Court has barred various entities from using the personality and publicity rights, including the name and voice of singer Jubin Nautiyal, without authorisation, saying “irreparable loss” may be caused without prohibition. The bench comprising Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that Nautiyal is “well-known, popular and a well-accepted personality” while passing an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of the singer restraining multiple AI platforms, websites, and e-commerce intermediaries from unauthorised use and commercial exploitation of his personality and publicity rights.