page contents

Prashant Bhushan strikes Supreme Court in search of recall of contempt of courtroom discover

New Delhi: Activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan has moved the Supreme Court in search of recall of its July 22 order by which discover was issued in opposition to him in a contempt continuing initiated for his alleged contemptuous tweets in opposition to the judiciary.

In his plea, Bhushan has sought a path to declare that the apex courtroom’s secretary normal has allegedly “acted unconstitutionally and illegally” in accepting a “defective contempt petition” filed in opposition to him, which was initially positioned on the executive facet and afterward the judicial facet.


Besides this, Bhushan has sought keep on the July 22 order and in addition on one other order for itemizing on August four the pending separate contempt case filed in opposition to him in 2009.

He has stated in his plea that the highest courtroom ought to “desist” from listening to each these issues by video-conferencing and listing them when the bodily listening to resumes.

On July 22, the apex courtroom had issued discover to Bhushan within the contempt continuing initiated in opposition to him for his alleged tweets, saying his statements prima facie “brought the administration of justice in disrepute”.


Later, on July 24, the courtroom had stated it could hear on August four the 2009 contempt case in opposition to Bhushan and journalist Tarun Tejpal for allegedly casting aspersions on some sitting and former prime courtroom judges in an interview to a information journal. Tejpal was the then editor of the journal.

In his plea, Bhushan has alleged that the contempt petition filed in opposition to him by one Mahek Maheshwari relating to a tweet posted by him “was defective” as consent of both the Attorney General or the Solicitor General was not obtained.

“It is most respectfully submitted that this court erred in taking suo motu cognizance of a petition that was defective to begin with and therefore, what could not have been done directly was done indirectly,” the plea stated.


It alleged that by taking cognizance on Maheshwari’s petition, the courtroom has “dispensed with the requirement of taking consent of the Attorney General or the Solicitor General which is the express and non-derogable mandate of law.”

While referring to the Supreme Court Rules 2013, the plea stated that the “defective contempt petition” should have been returned to Maheshwari.

“However, it appears from the order dated July 22, 2020 ….. the respondent (secretary general), in complete disregard for the mandate of law, proceeded to entertain the said petition on the administrative side and thereafter placed the matter on the judicial side before the bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Krishna Murari on July 22,” the plea stated.


Bhushan has claimed in his plea that secretary normal’s motion in “unilaterally” putting the contempt petition earlier than a bench presided over by Justice Mishra was “contrary to the settled law” as laid down by the highest courtroom which had categorically held that “Chief Justice of India is the master of the roster and enjoys the exclusive prerogative to constitute benches and assign matters to benches.”

“It is submitted that the actions of the respondent (secretary general) amount to a usurpation of the powers of the Chief Justice and are therefore clearly unlawful being contrary to settled law as well as the Supreme Court Rules 2013,” the plea claimed.


It alleged that actions of secretary normal resulting in initiation of contempt proceedings in opposition to Bhushan in addition to the discover as per which he has been directed to seem in individual earlier than the courtroom on August 5 “represent an infringement of the petitioner’s proper to life and liberty underneath Article 21 of the Constitution.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
%d bloggers like this: