English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

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

Published

7 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

Telegram restricted ahead of NEET-UG re-exam, NTA backs move to curb exam fraud

NTA has welcomed the Centre’s decision to temporarily restrict Telegram ahead of the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination, citing the need to prevent fraud and misinformation.

Published

2 hours ago

on

June 16, 2026

By

NEET

The Centre has imposed temporary restrictions on messaging platform Telegram ahead of the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination, with the National Testing Agency (NTA) welcoming the decision as part of efforts to prevent exam-related fraud and misinformation.

The temporary curbs will remain in place until June 22, a day after the NEET-UG re-exam scheduled for June 21. Authorities said the action was taken following concerns that the platform was being misused by cheating networks and individuals circulating misleading claims related to the examination.

NTA says move aimed at protecting exam integrity

According to the NTA, the restrictions are intended to safeguard candidates from fraudulent activities and false information that could affect the fairness of the examination process. The agency stated that maintaining the integrity of the re-examination remains a priority as lakhs of students prepare to appear for the test.

The NEET-UG re-exam is being conducted after the original examination was cancelled amid allegations of question paper leaks and irregularities. Since then, authorities have been monitoring online platforms for suspicious activity and misleading content targeting candidates.

Restrictions linked to concerns over fake paper leak claims

In recent weeks, several reports surfaced about Telegram channels allegedly offering access to leaked examination papers. The NTA had repeatedly advised students not to trust such claims and referred suspicious links and posts for verification by cybercrime authorities. No official confirmation of any genuine leaked re-exam paper had been issued.

Authorities believe the temporary restrictions will help limit the spread of fake content and reduce opportunities for organised exam fraud in the days leading up to the re-test.

Wider efforts to secure the re-examination

The government and examination authorities have introduced several measures ahead of the re-exam, including monitoring social media platforms and creating channels for reporting suspicious claims related to NEET-UG 2026. The NTA has also urged candidates to rely only on official communications for updates regarding the examination.

With the re-examination approaching, officials say the latest action is part of a broader effort to ensure a fair and transparent process for all candidates.

Continue Reading

India News

Abhishek Banerjee says will not bow to BJP after nearly 11 hours of ED questioning

After spending nearly 11 hours before the Enforcement Directorate, TMC leader Abhishek Banerjee said he would not bow to the BJP and accused the ruling party of using investigative agencies for political purposes.

Published

11 hours ago

on

June 16, 2026

By

Abhishek Banerjee

Trinamool Congress leader and Diamond Harbour MP Abhishek Banerjee on Tuesday said he would not bow to the BJP after spending nearly 11 hours being questioned by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with an ongoing investigation.

Speaking after the questioning, Banerjee alleged that central agencies were being used to target opposition leaders and asserted that he would continue his political fight despite what he described as sustained pressure.

The TMC leader has repeatedly maintained that investigations involving him are politically motivated, a charge he has made on several previous occasions while appearing before central agencies.

His appearance before the ED comes amid a period of heightened political activity and multiple investigations involving leaders in West Bengal. Recent days have also seen Banerjee face summons and questioning in separate matters by state investigative agencies.

After leaving the ED office, Banerjee reiterated that he would not be intimidated and said he remained committed to his political responsibilities. He also accused the BJP of attempting to weaken opposition parties through investigative action, an allegation that the BJP has rejected in the past.

The Enforcement Directorate has not publicly commented on Banerjee’s remarks. The investigation related to the questioning remains ongoing.

Continue Reading

India News

DMK attacks Rahul Gandhi, accuses him of weakening opposition unity

DMK has intensified its criticism of Rahul Gandhi, alleging that the Congress leader’s actions have weakened opposition unity and strained relations within the INDIA bloc.

Published

11 hours ago

on

June 16, 2026

By

Rahul-Gandhi

The war of words between the DMK and Congress has intensified, with the DMK launching a strong attack on Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and accusing him of contributing to divisions within the opposition alliance. The criticism comes amid strained ties between the two parties following their political split in Tamil Nadu.

According to the DMK, Rahul Gandhi’s political approach has weakened unity among opposition parties. The party’s IT wing mocked the Congress leader on social media, while an editorial published in the DMK’s official mouthpiece Murasoli questioned his recent remarks on opposition solidarity.

DMK questions Rahul Gandhi’s remarks on opposition unity

In its editorial, Murasoli argued that Rahul Gandhi was speaking about opposition unity despite, according to the DMK, contributing to disagreements among alliance partners in several states. The publication cited criticism directed at Congress by various opposition parties and suggested that the party’s actions had often created tensions within the INDIA bloc.

The editorial also referred to past political disputes involving Congress and Left parties, particularly in Kerala, claiming such episodes had raised concerns among opposition allies about Congress’s approach toward its partners.

Tamil Nadu political fallout adds to tensions

The attack comes after a major political realignment in Tamil Nadu. Following the 2026 Assembly elections, Congress ended its alliance with the DMK and joined the government led by Vijay’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK). The move left the DMK in the opposition and significantly altered the political equation between the two former allies.

The DMK has alleged that Congress benefited from the alliance during the election and later abandoned its partner. The party’s editorial questioned whether assurances from Congress leadership would be trusted by alliance partners after the developments in Tamil Nadu.

Congress rejects allegations

Congress has not issued a detailed official response to the editorial, but party sources have rejected the allegations. According to the party, its decisions in Tamil Nadu were made in line with the mandate delivered by voters and were not intended to undermine either the DMK or the broader opposition alliance.

The latest exchange highlights growing strains between two key opposition parties even as leaders continue to stress cooperation on national issues. Just days earlier, Rahul Gandhi had said that the DMK remained aligned with the opposition on defending the “idea of India” despite political differences.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com