SC gave two days to reconsider statement, Prashant Bhushan said in response


new Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday granted two days to the lawyer Prashant Bhushan, who has been convicted of criminal contempt for the derogatory tweet to the judiciary, to reconsider the ‘rebellious statement’ that denied apology for these tweets. Justice Arun Mishra, Justice BR From the three-member bench of Gavai and Justice Krishna Murari, Bhushan said he would consult his lawyers and consider the court’s suggestion. Also Read – Supreme Court said in Prashant Bhushan case- Court is fair for you, but are you …

Attorney General KK Venugopal requested the bench that Bhushan should no longer be given any punishment in the contempt case as he has already been convicted. The bench said that it cannot accept Venugopal’s request till Prashant Bhushan reconsiders his stand not to apologize for his tweet. Also Read – Sushant’s friend accused, Sushant-Sara had love during ‘Kedarnath’, then what fear was the breakup?

The bench told Venugopal that the tone, sentiment and description of Bhushan’s statement was going to spoil the case further. Is it defense or aggression? The court said that it can be very lenient if there is a feeling of making a mistake. The bench has also listed the case for 24 August. Also Read – SSR Case: Shiv Sena writes sharp comment on Nitish Kumar in mouthpiece ‘Saamana’, Bihar DGP ..

The apex court on August 14, in a 108-page judgment, held Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for two tweets that were derogatory to the judiciary. The court had said that these tweets cannot be called ‘for a healthy criticism of the functioning of the judiciary in the public interest’.

The court also analyzed these tweets posted by Bhushan on the micro-blogging site on June 27 about the functioning of the judiciary over the past six years and on July 22 about Chief Justice SA Bobde.

Earlier, at the commencement of the hearing, the bench rejected the request of Bhushan’s counsel that the second bench hear the question of sentence in the case convicted for contempt. The contemptor may be punished with imprisonment for a maximum period of six months or a fine of two thousand rupees or both.

The bench assured Bhushan that the punishment would not be implemented until a decision on his reconsideration petition against his conviction order was passed.

The bench told senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing on behalf of Bhushan, that he was asking him to do ‘inappropriate acts’ by requesting a hearing by another bench on the question of punishment. Justice Mishra said that he is retiring soon and therefore should not request an adjournment and a decision on reconsideration will be taken only after the final decision of the case.

The bench said that Bhushan’s application filed on Wednesday to adjourn the hearing on the question of sentence is not being considered until a decision on the reconsideration petition is taken. As soon as the proceedings started, Dave requested to postpone the hearing on the question of sentence in the case and said that he was filing a review petition against the order of conviction.

The apex court had on August 14 convicted Prashant Bhushan of criminal contempt for two tweets that were derogatory to the judiciary. The court said that these tweets cannot be said to have been in public interest for a healthy criticism of the functioning of the judiciary. Dave told the bench that suspending the hearing on the question of punishment will not break the sky.

To this, the bench said, “You are asking us for an unfair act by urging the other bench to hear the debate on the question of punishment.” Has it ever happened that while the main bench, another bench has heard the question of sentencing?

The bench told the Attorney General that she would first hear Bhushan on the issue of punishment. When Dave said that Venugopal should be allowed to debate first, the bench said, “Don’t make us care about professional norms”.

Bhushan himself addressed the court. He said that he has been misunderstood. He said, “I am discouraged and disappointed that the court did not think it necessary to provide me with a copy of the contempt petition.” My tweets reflect my views.

Prashant Bhushan said that open criticism is necessary to protect the constitutional system in a democracy. He said, “My tweets are a small effort to discharge the work which I consider my highest duty.” Bhushan said, “I will not ask for mercy. I will not even appeal for generosity. I will gladly accept the punishment that the court will give. “


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here