The very establishment of any democratic society is rule of Law. The judiciary is the guardian of the rule of law while the bar is the sentinel. Laws exist to forefend the system from undue inequitableness. The Integrity of the court subsists with both bar and bench, and the dignity of the court must be protected at all cost. The quintessence of contempt jurisprudence is obstruction of or interference with the administration of equity. The key to the court's ascendancy is people's confidence in the great institution and what shakes this faith is a blow to democracy. It is for this very purport that the courts are entrusted with the extraordinary power of penalizing those who indulge in acts, whether inside or outside the courts, which incline to undermine their ascendancy and bring disrepute by scandalizing or obstructing court. Hence the summary power of punishing for contempt has been given to courts- “to keep a blaze of glory around them, and to deter people from attempting to render them contemptible in the eyes of the public”. This Article will analyse the law of contempt with a historical perspective, judicial elucidation, and three recent cases of contemporary complications
