Don’t punish Bhushan in contempt case, says AG

SC gives Bhushan time till August 24 to tender an apology

NEW DELHI: : Attorney General of India KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court on Thursday that lawyer-activist Prashant Bhushan should not be punished for criminal contempt of court, in an unexpected twist to the proceedings even as the court reserved its judgment and gave time to Bhushan till August 24 to tender an unconditional apology for his tweets criticising it and Chief Justice of India (CJI) SA Bobde.

During the hearing before a three-judge bench headed by justice Arun Mishra, Bhushan stuck to his position saying speaking up was his duty as a citizen, refused to tender an apology, and indicated he was unlikely to change his mind. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Bhushan, cited the range of public interest causes Bhushan has been involved in.

The Supreme Court, on August 14, held Bhushan guilty of contempt of court for two tweets — the first, on June 27, where he was critical of the top court and the role of the last four chief justices, and, the second, on

June 29, where he criticised the current CJI. The hearing on Thursday was to decide on the sentence to be imposed on Bhushan.

Appearing in his personal capacity before the three-judge bench, Venugopal — whose consent was not obtained before the matter was taken up and who was not heard by the Supreme Court during the contempt hearings — said that while he is not seeking a review of the court’s judgment, the court should be magnanimous in not imposing any punishment on Bhushan.

“I request your lordships not to punish him (Bhushan),” AG Venugopal said, adding that Bhushan had done a lot of public good.

The AG also attempted to draw the attention of the court to previous instances when judges of the Supreme Court have criticised the functioning of the court and raised concerns of corruption in higher judiciary. “I have a list of five judges of Supreme

Court who said democracy has failed. I have a list of nine judges who said there is corruption in higher judiciary. Of these nine judges, two made statements while they were sitting judges and seven immediately after they retired. I myself gave a speech in 1987 at the Indian Law Institute…”

The bench, however, cut short the AG’S arguments, stating that its judgment of August 14 will not be reconsidered and the AG should not make arguments on the merits of the case since the case had already been decided. The bench asked the AG to restrict his submissions to the sentencing aspect.

“We are not on merits here. We are not hearing any review. Our judgment of August 14 stands,” justice Mishra said.

The bench, which also comprised justice BR Gavai and justice Krishna Murari, maintained that it can show leniency only if Bhushan expressed regret and reconsidered his statement where he declined to apologise.

Bhushan had prepared a statement which he read out to the court when the hearing of the case began on Thursday.