On Tuesday, 25 August, the Supreme Court reserved its order on sentencing in the contempt case relating to Bhushan’s recent tweets about the judiciary. This followed a long hearing in which Attorney General for India KK Venugopal continued to bat for Prashant Bhushan, urging the Supreme Court to show “statesmanship” and forgive the lawyer activist.
Bhushan’s lawyer Rajeev Dhavan also asked the court to show it had “broad shoulders” and not punish Bhushan, arguing that “severe criticism” was essential for the functioning of the court. The bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari expressed their concerns over the allegations made by Bhushan in his reply affidavit to the court, and raised concerns about the constant criticism of the court in recent times.
They also said that they “don’t feel that they have prevented fair criticism” from anyone, noting that there is another contempt case against Bhushan that has been going on for 11 years without any action.
The judges were conducting a hearing to consider the “effect” of Bhushan’s supplementary statement, submitted to the court on Monday, in which he had refused to apologise for the tweets which the court has held amounted to criminal contempt.
The same judges had held on 14 August that two tweets by Bhushan – one about CJI SA Bobde and a superbike and the other about the court’s role in the destruction of democracy over the last 6 years – amounted to criminal contempt, as they ‘scandalised’ the court.
The judges had not specified the penalty for this contempt in their verdict, instead conducting another hearing on 20 August where Bhushan’s lawyers were allowed to argue on sentencing. In that previous hearing, they had decided to give Bhushan till 24 August to offer an ‘unconditional apology’.
Instead of an apology, however, Bhushan submitted a supplementary statement on the day confirming that he still held to his beliefs, and that as a result, any apology from him would be “insincere”.
ATTORNEY GENERAL URGES COURT TO SHOW ‘STATESMANSHIP’
When the hearing commenced, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Bhushan, asked the judges to let Bhushan read out his supplementary statement. Justice Mishra said there was no need for this as the judges had already read the statement.
Attorney General KK Venugopal was then asked by the judges to “guide us”. The AG proceeded, suggesting that this was a “fit case” to forgive Bhushan. He noted that five retired judges of the Supreme Court had also raised similar concerns.
"“From time to time My lords, retired judges and sitting judges have been making comments. We have serious statements by five judges about Supreme Court having failed to maintain democracy.”" - Attorney General KK Venugopal
Venugopal said that such statements should be viewed as requests for self-improvement in the administration of justice.
The judges then pointed out that Bhushan, in his supplementary statement, has said that the Supreme Court didn’t consider his reply (contained in a detailed affidavit). They repeated what they said at the last hearing, that Bhushan’s lawyers had not referred to the whole affidavit during their oral arguments, and hence they had not considered the whole affidavit.
Justice Mishra then suggested that the contents of that affidavit could in fact be taken as an “aggravation”, given the allegations it contained. Reference was made to allegations against former CJI Dipak Misra, as well as Bhushan’s comments in the affidavit about the Ayodhya judgment and the way the apex court was becoming more “executive-minded”.
“No judge, sitting or retired, has been spared,” Justice Mishra observed.
AG Venugopal suggested that these allegations could be withdrawn, and that if Bhushan then made an expression of regret similar to the one he’d made in the 2009 contempt case on corruption allegations against the judiciary, "that would be a fitting end to this matter.”
COURT’S DEMAND OF UNCONDITIONAL APOLOGY IS COERCION: RAJEEV DHAVAN
Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan then began his arguments for Bhushan. He began by noting that Bhushan had contributed a great deal to the court in the public causes he had taken up, and in his role as amicus curiae to it.
He pointed out that Justice Arun Mishra, when Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, had refused to hold Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee in contempt for her comments about judges being corrupt.
Dhavan argued that there was nothing wrong with criticism of the court, even “strong criticism”, rather that the contrary was true. “The Supreme Court will collapse if it does not face severe criticism,” he said.
He also contended that the court’s order of 20 August, in which it said it was giving him till 24 August to issue an unconditional apology was an “exercise of coercion”.
Dhavan then explained why he had asked for Bhushan’s statement to be read out to the court. He said that the judges were only focusing on what he said about not apologising, but the statement needed to be read as a whole, including his statement of respect for the court.
“An apology shouldn’t be made just to get out of clutches of the court,” Dhavan suggested, adding that “an apology must be sincere.” A sincere explanation, he according to him, should be considered to fall within the term ‘apology’.
Dhavan once again argued that “responsible criticism” was essential for the functioning of the court, and it was the duty of lawyers to do so. “The court is not immune from criticism,” he said, noting that while one could be proud of many judgments of the court (including its recent one by Justice Mishra on ensuring equal inheritance rights for Hindu women), there had been many troubling ones as well.
He concluded his arguments for Bhushan by saying that that the verdict holding Bhushan guilty on 14 August should be suo motu recalled by the court. He said that if it comes to punishment, the court in its reprimand can hardly tell Bhushan not to criticise it again.
In its order, he instead suggested that the court can express its disagreement with the things Bhushan has said, and urge Bhushan to be “a little restrained” in his criticism, and to make sure he gets his facts right.
Finally, he reiterated the AG’s request for “statesmanship” by the court, and urged them not to make Bhushan “a martyr” by imposing punishment.
WHAT HAPPENED AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING ON 20 AUGUST?
During an extraordinary hearing, Bhushan refused to apologise, his lawyers argued that he had acted in good faith and the judges appeared to admit they had not referred to Bhushan’s detailed reply affidavit when passing their verdict.
In a major development, Attorney General for India KK Venugopal also came out in support of Bhushan, asking the judges to not punish the lawyer-activist, while also pointing out that retired judges of the Supreme Court had said things similar to the contents of his tweets.
However, the court did not allow the senior law officer to make any detailed arguments, and said that they could not consider his suggestion to not punish Bhushan, unless Bhushan were to rethink his decision not to apologise.
Justice Mishra also informed Bhushan’s lawyers that despite Bhushan’s long record of service and the many good causes he had fought for over the years, they could not be lenient in their sentence unless he realised he had made a mistake and admitted this.
Although the judges rejected an application by Bhushan in which he had requested them to defer the sentencing till after his review petition against the court’s decision on contempt was heard, they assured him that if any sentence is passed against him, it would not be activated until his review petition had been decided.
Bhushan has till 30 days from the date of the court’s original verdict, to file a review petition.
BHUSHAN’S REFUSAL TO APOLOGISE
Bhushan first said he would not apologise in a statement to the court on 20 August itself, when he said he would not ask for “mercy”, and, paraphrasing Mahatma Gandhi, he would “cheerfully submit” to any punishment the court specified for him. When the judges urged him to rethink this statement, he said he was unlikely to change his mind but would think about it.
On 24 August, the deadline for him to submit an apology, he reiterated his decision not to apologise. Affirming his respect for the Supreme Court as an institution, he said that he had only been fulfilling his duty as a citizen and a lawyer by pointing out what he felt was a deviation from its sterling record. As a result, he said:
"“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.”"
UP now has highest number of dolphins in…
03-03-2025
India's first survey of riverine dolphins has found 6,327 dolphins in 28 rivers across eight states, with Uttar Pradesh recording the highest numbers. Prime Minister Modi emphasized dolphin conservation and...
Read more
Himani Narwal murder: Accused Sachin cau…
03-03-2025
Sachin, who has confessed to strangling Himani Narwal with a phone charger cable, was shown in CCTV footage carrying a suitcase containing her body. Police believe the murder was due...
Read moreShahzadi Khan execution: UAE officially …
03-03-2025
An Indian national, Shahzadi Khan, was executed in the UAE on February 15, 2025, after being convicted of murdering an infant in her care. Despite multiple legal appeals and mercy...
Read more
After Olympics honour, China again felic…
03-03-2025
Chinese government has honored Qi Fabao, a regiment commander injured during the 2020 Galwan clash with India, among 33 individuals recognized for outstanding performance at a Beijing ceremony. This follows...
Read morePM Modi chairs National Board for Wildli…
03-03-2025
Prime Minister Narendra Modi chaired the 7th meeting of the National Board for Wildlife at Gir National Park, presenting significant conservation initiatives. Key announcements included the first riverine dolphin estimation...
Read moreWatch: Karnataka MLAs get 15 recliners f…
03-03-2025
The Karnataka assembly lounge now features 15 recliner chairs, including two massage chairs, to allow MLAs to take quick naps after lunch. This initiative, proposed by speaker UT Khader, aims...
Read more'Under influence of ...': Mayawati expel…
03-03-2025
Mayawati has expelled her nephew Akash Anand from the Bahujan Samaj Party due to his political immaturity and his susceptibility to his father-in-law's influence. She emphasized the importance of the...
Read moreUP woman executed in UAE on Feb 15, MEA …
03-03-2025
The MEA informed the Delhi high court about Shahzadi Khan's execution in the UAE on February 15, with her cremation scheduled for March 5. Shahzadi, from Uttar Pradesh, had been...
Read more'We know how to deal with them': SC blas…
03-03-2025
The Supreme Court reprimanded comedian Samay Raina for his comments in Canada about the ongoing case involving his show 'India’s Got Latent'. The court also allowed podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia to...
Read more'Every citizen should contribute to welf…
03-03-2025
Defence minister Rajnath Singh called on citizens to contribute to the welfare of soldiers and their families, emphasizing it as a national duty. Speaking at the AFFD CSR Conclave in...
Read moreSamajwadi leader Abu Azmi says Aurangzeb…
03-03-2025
A controversy has erupted in Maharashtra after SP leader Abu Azmi defended Mughal emperor Aurangzeb, stating he was not cruel and built many temples. Maharashtra deputy CM Eknath Shinde condemned...
Read moreEAM Jaishankar to visit UK & Ireland…
03-03-2025
External affairs minister S Jaishankar will visit the UK and Ireland from March 4-9. In the UK, he will negotiate with foreign secretary David Lammy and engage with dignitaries and...
Read more'IIT Baba' arrested? Abhay Singh clarifi…
03-03-2025
Abhay Singh, also known as 'IIT Baba', was detained in Jaipur under the NDPS Act for possession of marijuana but was granted bail due to the small quantity involved. He...
Read more
Hit wicket? Congress leader stirs row wi…
03-03-2025
Congress spokesperson Shama Mohamed's controversial remarks about cricket captain Rohit Sharma's fitness and leadership abilities have sparked widespread debate. While some politicians and party members condemned her comments, others supported...
Read moreDelhi airport launches new system to imp…
03-03-2025
Delhi airport operator DIAL has launched the Unified Total Airside Management (UTAM) system to enhance operational efficiency and safety. Using AI, ML, IoT, and radar, UTAM monitors airside vehicles, tracks...
Read moreFormulate guidelines on regulating socia…
03-03-2025
The Supreme Court urged the central government to establish guidelines for regulating social media content after controversy over explicit content involving comedian Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahbadia. The court emphasized...
Read more'The test is difficult and the fight is …
03-03-2025
Akash Anand respects Mayawati’s decision to remove him from all BSP posts, describing it as personally emotional yet a significant challenge. He remains dedicated to the party's mission, asserting that...
Read more
