*Will give 2-Three days to Prashant Bhushan to rethink his ‘defiant assertion’, refusing to apologise for his contemptuous tweets: SC.
*Prashant Bhushan says he’ll seek the advice of his attorneys and suppose over SC’s suggestion in 2-Three days.
*Attorney General Ok Ok Venugopal urges SC to not award any punishment to Prashant Bhushan in contempt case, says he has already been convicted.
*SC says it can’t think about request of Attorney General until Prashant Bhushan reconsiders his earlier stand of not apologising for his tweets. PTI
New Delhi, August 20
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected the submission of activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan that one other bench hear the arguments on quantum of sentence within the contempt case wherein he has been held responsible for derogatory tweets in opposition to the judiciary.
A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra gave assurance to Bhushan that no punishment can be acted upon until his overview in opposition to the order convicting him within the case is set.
The bench, additionally comprising Justices B R Gavi and Krishna Murari, advised senior advocate Dushyant Dave, representing Bhushan that he’s asking them to commit an “act of impropriety” by saying that the argument on sentencing be heard by one other bench.
Justice Mishra stated he can be retiring quickly and adjournment shouldn’t be sought and the overview can be determined after this matter is set lastly.
A contemnor will be punished with easy imprisonment of as much as six months or with a effective of as much as Rs 2,000 or with each.
The bench stated it’s not inclined to listen to the applying filed by Bhushan on Wednesday searching for deferment of listening to on the sentence until his overview petition is set.
At the outset, Dave sought deferment of listening to on the quantum of sentence within the case saying he can be submitting a overview petition in opposition to the conviction order.
The high courtroom on August 14 held Bhushan responsible of prison contempt for his derogatory tweets in opposition to the judiciary saying they can’t be stated to be a good criticism of the functioning of the judiciary made within the public curiosity.
During the listening to on Thursday, Dave advised the bench that “heavens are not going to fall” if the apex courtroom will droop the listening to on quantum of sentence.
“You are asking us to commit an act of impropriety that arguments on sentencing should be heard by another bench,” the bench stated.
It added: “Has it been ever done that hearing on sentencing has been undertaken by the other bench when the main bench is existing?”
The bench advised Attorney General KK Venugopal that it’s going to first hear Bhushan on the problem of sentencing.
When Dave stated that Venugopal needs to be allowed to argue first, the bench stated, “Don’t remind us of the professional norms.”
Bhushan, who himself addressed the courtroom, stated he had been “grossly misunderstood”.
“I am dismayed and disappointed that the court did not find it necessary to provide me the copy of the contempt petition,” he stated. “My tweets simply showed my bona fide belief.”
Bhushan stated that open criticism is important in democracy to safeguard the constitutional order. “My tweets were a small attempt to discharge what I consider my highest duty,” he stated.
“I do not ask for mercy. I do not appeal for magnanimity. I cheerfully submit to any punishment that the court may impose,” stated Bhushan.
The listening to within the matter continues to be on.
On August 14, in its 108-page verdict, the highest courtroom had stated: “The tweets that are based mostly on the distorted info, in our thought of view, quantity to committing prison contempt.
“In the result, we hold alleged contemnor No.1, Prashant Bhushan, guilty of having committed criminal contempt of this court.”
The high courtroom had, nonetheless, discharged the discover issued to Twitter Inc, California, US, within the contempt case after accepting its rationalization that it is just an middleman and doesn’t have any management on what the customers submit on the platform.
It had stated the corporate had additionally proven its bona fides instantly after the cognizance was taken by this courtroom because it had suspended each the tweets.
The high courtroom had analysed the 2 tweets of Bhushan posted on the micro-blogging web site on June 27 on the functioning of judiciary in previous six years, and on July 22 with regard to Chief Justice of India SA Bobde.
“In our considered view, it cannot be said that the tweets can be said to be a fair criticism of the functioning of the judiciary, made bona fide in the public interest,” it had stated. PTI
What occurred because the listening to started
*SC refuses to defer arguments on sentence.
*The Supreme Court begins listening to the prison contempt case in opposition to advocate Prashant Bhushan on the purpose of punishment to him.
*A Bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari is listening to arguments.
*Senior advocate Dushyant Dave begins by referring to overview jurisdiction of the courtroom and the plea by Bhushan to defer the punishment until the overview petition is filed and determined.
*SC refuses to defer arguments on the sentence.
*Justice Mishra says, “We guarantee you we won’t do something to defeat your proper of overview. We aren’t proposing to defer the sentence listening to.”
*Prashant Bhushan makes a press release earlier than the Bench.
*“I am pained at the verdict that the court held me guilty. I am pained that I am grossly misunderstood. I am shocked that the court concluded without providing any evidence about my motives,” Bhushan submits.
*“I am pained and shocked that the court did not provide me with the complaint on the basis of which the contempt was taken. I am dismayed that the court did not consider my reply affidavit,” Bhushan submits.
*“I believe that open criticism is necessary in any democracy to safeguard the constitutional order. Saving the constitutional order should come above personal or professional interests. My tweets were a small attempt to discharge what I consider my highest duty,” says Bhushan.
*”I don’t ask for mercy. I don’t enchantment for magnanimity. I cheerfully undergo any punishment that the courtroom might impose,” Bhushan says quoting Gandhi.
*“My tweets were out of a bona fide attempt to discharge my duty as a citizen. I would have been failing in my duty if I did not speak up at this juncture of history. I submit to any penalty which the court may inflict. It would be contemptuous on my part to offer apology,” says Bhushan.
*Hearing continues. TNS