Contempt case against Prashant Bhushan for posting tweets: SC reserves verdict on sentencing

Contempt case against Prashant Bhushan for posting tweets: SC reserves verdict on sentencing ^Featured

Super User 25 August 2020

Rate this item

(0 votes)

font size decrease font size increase font size

In the hearing on Tuesday, the court heard Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan appearing for Prashant Bhushan and Attorney General for India KK Venugopal at length, before deciding to reserve the verdict

The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on the sentence to be imposed on advocate Prashant Bhushan in the contempt case filed against him for his tweets criticising the judiciary, legal news website BarandBench.com reported.

The order was reserved by a Bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari, who heard Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan and Attorney General for India KK Venugopal at length.

Dhavan, appearing for Bhushan, informed the court that his client had submitted a statement clarifying his stance yesterday.Bhushan had filed a supplementary statement reiterating his position to stand by his tweets. He refused to apologise for the tweets for which he was held to be in contempt for. His statement says, "If I retract a statement before this court that I otherwise believe to be true or offer an insincere apology, that in my eyes would amount to the contempt of my conscience and of an institution that I hold in highest esteem."

The court then sought the views of Attorney General KK Venugopal on how to proceed with the matter. The AG responded, "He (Bhushan) may be given a warning first and let go. He need not be punished."Justice Mishra then said, "But he doesn't think whatever he did was wrong. He did not submit an apology...What to do when someone does not think they did something wrong?"

The AG then reminded the Bench of the time he had proceeded against Bhushan in connection with the Rafale case."He (Bhushan) expressed regret and then when I read it, I thought we should not proceed with contempt and I withdrew the same because he expressed regret...it will be a great service if Your Lordships take a compassionate view and leave it there," he said.

Justice Mishra went on to say, "When Mr. Bhushan does not think he did anything wrong then what is the point of giving him advice to not repeat it?"

When the AG pointed out the good work Bhushan has done by filing PILs before the Court, Justice Gavai remarked, "PILs and all is good work but when it came to you, even you filed a contempt......You withdrew it only after he expressed regret. But that's not the case here."

Justice Mishra added, "There are very serious statements made. They are asking us to consider his defence during sentencing...He has made so many remarks. Even in the Ramjanmabhoomi case...Only one of those judges has retired."

When Venugopal said that Bhushan would not do it again, the court replied, "Let him say that. But he then instead of that he gave colour to those tweets."

Venugopal then suggested that Bhushan's response be taken off record. However, Justice Mishra said, "Everyone is criticizing us that we have not considered his response and the AG is saying take his response off the record... Now if this is removed, we will be blamed that we removed his response on our own."

The Bench went on to refer to a statement made by Bhushan saying that the "Supreme Court has collapsed"."Isn't that objectionable?" asked Justice Mishra.Referring to the various allegations made by Bhushan in his filings, Justice Mishra said, "Which judge is left out, sitting or retired?" The Court then broke for lunch.