The Narmada Bachao Andolan contempt of court case, involving advocate Prashant Bhushan, Medha Patkar and Arundhati Roy, is analysed here from three perspectives: the frivolous nature of the complaint; the scope of the fundamental right to freedom of speech as against the power to punish for contempt of court; and the need for restraint on the part of social activists in their criticism of the judiciary.