English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

SC issues contempt notice to Prashant Bhushan on Attorney General Venugopal’s plea

Published

6 years ago

on

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Supreme Court today (Wednesday, February 6), issued a notice to senior advocate Prashant Bhushan on a contempt of court petition filed by Attorney General KK Venugopal and the Centre for his tweets that allegedly criticised the court over the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as interim CBI director.

Bhushan, who accepted the notice in person, was directed to file his reply within three weeks.

The Centre moved the apex court yesterday, days after Venugopal’s contempt petition against Bhushan, seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against Bhushan for his tweets and said they amounted to making false statement in a pending case. The Centre’s plea also referred to the contents of Venugopal’s petition and submitted that they be also read as part of its plea.

Bhushan, in a series of tweets, said that the Attorney General had misled the apex court last week on the process followed in the controversial appointment of Nageswara Rao as the interim CBI director.

During a hearing on a plea filed by NGO Common Cause, Venugopal had told the Supreme Court bench led by Justice Arun Mishra that the selection committee mandated to pick the CBI director had cleared Rao’s appointment as interim head of the agency, first when CBI director Alok Verma was divested of his responsibilities on October 23 and then again when he was summarily dismissed by the panel on January 10.

Bhushan had claimed that Venugopal had misled the court, saying that he had spoken to Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge and learnt that the selection committee had not discussed the appointment of Rao as interim CBI director.

Kharge is a member of the selection committee that also comprises Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi.

Venugopal said Bhushan, in one of his tweets on February 1, had said, “I have just confirmed personally from the leader of opposition Mr. Kharge that no discussion or decision in HPC meet was taken re-appointment of Nageswara Rao as interim Director of CBI. The govt appears to have misled the court and perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of the HPC meeting.”

The attorney general said the statement/confirmation attributed to Kharge could never have been made by him for the simple reason that he himself had signed the minutes of the meeting which also contained the final decisions of the high-powered committee.

Rao’s stint as interim CBI director ended on February 2 after the selection committee, by a 2:1 majority decision, appointed former Madhya Pradesh Director General of Police, Rishi Kumar Shukla as the new full-time director of the agency. With Shukla having taken over charge of the investigation agency, the petition challenging Rao’s appointment has become inconsequential.

On Wednesday, as the bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Naveen Sinha resumed hearing arguments in the petition challenging Rao’s appointment, the issue of whether Bhushan can be held in contempt for his tweets took precedence.

Curiously, Venugopal insisted that he did not favour the court giving out any punishment to Bhushan on account of possible contempt and that he would, instead, prefer “authoritative words” from the court on the issues red flagged by him. However, Venugopal’s immediate junior in the government’s team of law officers, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, implored the bench to penalise Bhushan.

Venugopal informed the bench that the selection committee had discussed the issue of Rao’s appointment as interim CBI director and that even Kharge had signed on the panel’s decision. Justice Mishra wondered how Bhushan posted the tweets about a matter that was sub judice. The Attorney General then contended that Bhushan’s action could be seen as “contempt by speech” since the comments “lower the authority of the court” and “intervene with the working of the court”.

As Justice Mishra lamented the “unwelcome practice” of lawyers routinely making statements on pending matters, the Attorney General pointed out that even as the case was proceeding, “12 cameramen are waiting for lawyers outside” to get their comments. Venugopal then urged the petitioner (Bhushan) to desist from discussing sub judice matters in public and added that while it is presumed that comments made in public and in the media do not affect the opinion of a judge, this may not always happen.

Justice Mishra said that the Bar should not display a sycophancy towards the Bench and added that lawyers like the Attorney General and senior advocate Fali Nariman had made the Bar “worthy and admirable”. Justice Mishra then proceeded to say that the extant case (the contempt petition) involves larger issues and that the bench would want to “settle the law” on them. Justice Sinha concurred with Justice Mishra and added that “time has come to realise that with freedom comes responsibility”.

Venugopal then insisted that while does want the law on contempt settled in the present case, he is not pressing for any punishment to be meted out for anyone.

Solicitor General Mehta, disagreeing with the Attorney General, told the bench: “I can cite 10 instances where a judgment is passed by the highest court and some lawyers say it is a black day for the judiciary.”

Mehta, on behalf of the Centre, proceeded to say that the bench should award a “deterrent punishment” to Bhushan as “the respondent has been involved in several such instances.” He added that the “Lordships’ magnanimity should not be taken as a form of weakness” and urged the bench to issue a notice to Bhushan.

Responding to the Solicitor General’s request, Justice Mishra said: “Punishment shouldn’t come for lawyers usually. Contempt is like a brahmashtra. It should be used sparingly so that it doesn’t lose its value. We are mindful of how reckless comments deprive dignity of others without a due process of law… the larger issue here is that media trial decides the reputation of a person who, ultimately, may win in court but has been widely criticized in public (sic). There is no repairing mechanism for that reputation”.

The bench then issued a notice to Bhushan, which he accepted in open court. While Bhushan has to reply to the contempt notice within three weeks, the contempt plea has been posted for its next hearing on March 7.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

Parliament winter session: Government lists 15 bills, including Waqf bill

The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

Published

17 hours ago

on

November 21, 2024

By

The government has listed five new ones and one to amend the contentious Waqf law out of 15 bills for the winter session of Parliament. The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.

The government has introduced five new bills, including the Coastal Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to promote coasting trade and increase the participation of Indian-flagged vessels owned and operated by Indian citizens for both national security and commercial purposes.

Another significant legislation that will be introduced by the government is the Indian Ports Bill, 2024. This bill is designed to implement measures for the conservation of ports, enhance security, and manage pollution, ensuring compliance with India’s international obligations and statutory requirements.

Additionally, the government plans to introduce the Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to meet India’s obligations under maritime treaties and support the development of Indian shipping while ensuring the efficient operation of the Indian mercantile marine in a way that serves national interests.

Pending legislation includes the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which is awaiting consideration and passage after the joint committee of both Houses submits its report to the Lok Sabha. The committee is expected to report by the end of the first week of the winter session.

Currently, there are eight bills, including the Waqf (Amendment) Bill and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, pending in the Lok Sabha, while two additional bills are in the Rajya Sabha.

Furthermore, the government has also listed the Punjab Courts (Amendment) Bill for introduction, consideration, and passage, which seeks to increase the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of Delhi district courts from Rs 3 lakh to Rs 20 lakh.

The Merchant Shipping Bill, along with the Coastal Shipping Bill and the Indian Ports Bill, is slated for introduction and eventual passage.

Continue Reading

India News

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.

Published

18 hours ago

on

November 21, 2024

By

International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes

The International Criminal Court (ICC) today issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare. The leaders allegedly restricted essential supplies such as food, water, and medical aid to civilians in Gaza, resulting in severe humanitarian crises and deaths, including among children.

Last year in October, Israel had launched attacks on Gaza in retaliation for the surprise attack by Hamas. The Israel-Hamas war has led to the death of thousands of civilians, while lakhs have been displaced. The major infrastructures in Gaza, including hospitals and schools, were also destroyed as Israel vowed to wipe out Hamas.

The International Criminal Court stated that it found reasonable grounds to believe the accused intentionally targeted civilians and limited medical supplies, forcing unsafe medical procedures, which caused immense suffering. This ruling was based on the findings from at least October 8, 2023 until at least May 20, 2024.

The court remarked that it has assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that PM Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza.

Furthermore, it also noted that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and medical supplies created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, leading to death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration.

Additionally, the International Criminal Court dismissed two challenges by Israel against its jurisdiction in the situation in the State of Palestine.

Notably, Israel had contested the ICC’s jurisdiction, claiming it could not be exercised without Israel’s consent. Nonetheless, the Chamber ruled that the Court has jurisdiction based on Palestine’s territorial scope, including Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. It further noted that Israel’s objections were premature, as jurisdictional challenges under the Rome Statute can only be made after an arrest warrant is issued.

Reportedly, Israel had also requested a fresh notification regarding the investigation, started in 2021. Denying the request, the court stated that Israel had earlier declined to request a deferral, making additional notifications unnecessary.

Continue Reading

India News

Yogi Adityanath accords tax-free status to Sabarmati Report film in Uttar Pradesh

Earlier, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah have also praised this film.

Published

18 hours ago

on

November 21, 2024

By

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Thursday accorded a tax-free status to ‘The Sabarmati Report’ film, based on the train burning incident at Godhra in Gujarat in 2002, in the state.

The announcement was made after Chief Minister Adityanath attended the screening of Vikrant Massey and Raashii Khanna-starrer ‘The Sabarmati Report’ in Lucknow with the film’s cast.  

Speaking to reporters, actor Vikrant Massey thanked the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister for making ‘The Sabarmati Report’ film tax-free in the state. “I want to thank Yogi Adityanath ji. This is an important film and I appeal to everyone to go and watch this film,” he said.

Chief Minister Adityanath along with many of his cabinet colleagues watched the film ‘The Sabarmati Report’ under a special screening at a cinema hall in the capital, said a spokesperson of the state government.

Several people associated with the film unit were also present on the occasion. Later the chief minister announced to make this film tax-free in UP.

The BJP-ruled states have been praising the makers of The Sabarmati Report, claiming the team has tried to bring out this truth in front of the people of the country through the film.

The saffron party is appealing to people to watch this film and try to get closer to the truth of Godhra.

Uttar Pradesh becomes the sixth BJP-ruled state after Haryana, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat to declare lead actors Vikrant Massey and Raashii Khanna’s film tax-free.

Adityanath said along with identifying the faces of those who are conspiring against the country for political gains, there is also a need to expose them. The film team has discharged its responsibilities to expose the truth, he said, adding an attempt has been made to bring the real truth in front of the country in a big way through the film.

The Sabarmati Report is said to be based on the incident of setting fire to a train full of ‘karsevaks’ in Godhra on February 27, 2002, killing 90 devotees. After this incident, communal riots broke out in Gujarat. Earlier, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah have also praised this film.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com