Legal opinion on some decisions by the Judiciary?

I would ask for the opinion from eminent lawyers on the following points :

a) For wilful violation of Court's orders, the Hon'ble HC had passed orders of punishment to some topbrass Govt.rank & files. Of them, the Appx Court stayed the pronouncement for at least one such topbrass Official. The point was WILFUL disregard of Court's orders. Any stay on this must raise at least one question - Was such violation/disregard is permissible in any sitution or circumstance and as such, could be stayed ?

b) In past, Politicians virtually 'abused' the judiciary as well as one or more sitting Judges. Under what provision of law they got exempted for proceedings of contempt ?
c) Siting all such things, can we, the common people, ask for exemption (to be proceeded against) ?
yes either by way of pil or right of information from the competent authority
Obey the judiciary. If you are not satisfied with their decision go to higher court. One can form his own judgement about a court decision. But they have no right to disobey.


Answer:
A lawyer, who is not eminent answers: (a) Under the constittion, any decision of the High Courts are appealable to supreme Court, either with certificate of leave to appeal, granted by the gigh Court or through a special leave petition or direct appeal in case the decision of the High Court is under its original jurisdiction ( that is first court where the issue is agitated). Pending hearing of the appeal,various stsages are involved entailing time lag. In the interregum, if the order of the High Court is sought to be implemented, and if the matter becomes a fait accompli or likely to result in irreparable injury to the appellant, a need would arise to stay the implementation of the decision. The grant of stay on any matter not necessarily, contempt of court, is a matter of discretion of the court, from Munsif's to Supreme Courts and the guiding principle is doctrine of balance of convenience. Exercise of appellate power by a superior court and exercise of discretionary power to grant a stay, do not per-se constitute any sort of condonation of the infraction of law alleged against a person. No infraction of any law in force including contempt of court is permissible, but a superior court always has got an obligation to the constitution to see whether the power vested in a lower court has been properly,judicially,impartiall... and objectively exercised or not.
(b) Fair criticism is permissible but not to overawe the judiciary or interfere in the judicial administration of justice. BUT JUDICIARY IS ALSO CONSCIOUS THAT THE POWER TO PUNSH A PERSON FOR CONTEMPT, BEING AN EXTRAORDINARY POWER DEPARTING FROM A CARDINAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW OF NATURAL JUSTICE, that no person should be a judge in his own cause, such power should be exercised with utmost caution, circumspection and sparingly, also taking a mild view when an unqualified regret is expressed. But such light approach and consequent escape from the penal provision of law does not have the effect of condonation of the contemner nor does it provide a licence to continue such act.Applies to all including politicians.
(c)Answer is an emphatic NO. Precedents do not vest any right of pardon of an offence in the offender. No two cases are alike in the facts and circumstances. Plea for mercy is not a vested riht.