Skip to main content
Sabrang
Sabrang
Freedom Rule of Law

SC grants Prashant Bhushan time before sentencing

Power-packed proceedings, where Bhushan put his opponents on the backfoot several times

Sabrangindia 20 Aug 2020

Prashant bhushan

In a bit of an anti-climax on Thursday, the Supreme Court did not pronounce the quantum of punishment for Prashant Bhushan in the contempt of court case in connection with his tweets. The court instead granted him time to rethink his statement.

This, despite Bhushan insisting that his statement was “well considered and well thought of”. In fact, Bhushan categorically said, “If your lordships want to give me time, I welcome. But I don't think it will serve any useful purpose and it will be a waste of time of the Court. It is not very likely that I will change my statement.”

Earlier during proceedings Bhushan had made it clear that we would accept any punishment the court deemed fit. He quoted MK Gandhi saying, “I do not ask for mercy. I do not appeal for magnanimity. I cheerfully submit to any punishment that the court may impose.” He added, “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 an apology.”

Arguments by advocates Dr. Rajeev Dhavan and Dushyant Dave focused on the nature of the offence and the nature of the contempnor i.e Prashant Bhushan. Arguing on the nature of the offence, referring to Section 13 of the Contempt of Court Act, Dr. Dhavan submitted that it wasn't enough that there should be some technical contempt. It must be shown that the act of contempt must "substantially interfere with the administration of justice".

When it came to the nature of the contempnor, the lawyers referred to several key cases of public interest spearheaded by Bhushan such as the coal scam, 2G, powers of Central Vigilance Commissioner, etc. to showcase Prashant Bhushan’s stellar track record and his unwavering commitment to social justice and Constitutional principles.

Then the Attorney General KK Venugopal suggested that the Court give Bhushan time to reconsider his statement, to which Bhushan responded saying, “I don't want to reconsider the statement. As regards giving time, I don't think it will serve any useful purpose.”

That’s when the case took a rather curious turn with AG Venugopal requesting the bench not to punish Bhushan! To this, according to Live Law, Justice Arun Mishra responded saying, “We cannot consider your proposal (of not punishing him) unless he rethinks his statement.” He added, “We will have to consider whether his statement was defence or aggravation.” According to Live Law, Justice Mishra further said, “When it comes to sentencing, we can be lenient only when the person tenders apology and realizes the mistake in the real sense.”

When senior advocate CU Singh submitted that he had challenged the Registrar’s order which rejected an intervention application, his appeal was dismissed and the hearing was concluded.

 

Related:

I submit to any penalty which the court may inflict: Prashant Bhushan

Justice delivery must be Constitutional

SC grants Prashant Bhushan time before sentencing

Power-packed proceedings, where Bhushan put his opponents on the backfoot several times

Prashant bhushan

In a bit of an anti-climax on Thursday, the Supreme Court did not pronounce the quantum of punishment for Prashant Bhushan in the contempt of court case in connection with his tweets. The court instead granted him time to rethink his statement.

This, despite Bhushan insisting that his statement was “well considered and well thought of”. In fact, Bhushan categorically said, “If your lordships want to give me time, I welcome. But I don't think it will serve any useful purpose and it will be a waste of time of the Court. It is not very likely that I will change my statement.”

Earlier during proceedings Bhushan had made it clear that we would accept any punishment the court deemed fit. He quoted MK Gandhi saying, “I do not ask for mercy. I do not appeal for magnanimity. I cheerfully submit to any punishment that the court may impose.” He added, “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 an apology.”

Arguments by advocates Dr. Rajeev Dhavan and Dushyant Dave focused on the nature of the offence and the nature of the contempnor i.e Prashant Bhushan. Arguing on the nature of the offence, referring to Section 13 of the Contempt of Court Act, Dr. Dhavan submitted that it wasn't enough that there should be some technical contempt. It must be shown that the act of contempt must "substantially interfere with the administration of justice".

When it came to the nature of the contempnor, the lawyers referred to several key cases of public interest spearheaded by Bhushan such as the coal scam, 2G, powers of Central Vigilance Commissioner, etc. to showcase Prashant Bhushan’s stellar track record and his unwavering commitment to social justice and Constitutional principles.

Then the Attorney General KK Venugopal suggested that the Court give Bhushan time to reconsider his statement, to which Bhushan responded saying, “I don't want to reconsider the statement. As regards giving time, I don't think it will serve any useful purpose.”

That’s when the case took a rather curious turn with AG Venugopal requesting the bench not to punish Bhushan! To this, according to Live Law, Justice Arun Mishra responded saying, “We cannot consider your proposal (of not punishing him) unless he rethinks his statement.” He added, “We will have to consider whether his statement was defence or aggravation.” According to Live Law, Justice Mishra further said, “When it comes to sentencing, we can be lenient only when the person tenders apology and realizes the mistake in the real sense.”

When senior advocate CU Singh submitted that he had challenged the Registrar’s order which rejected an intervention application, his appeal was dismissed and the hearing was concluded.

 

Related:

I submit to any penalty which the court may inflict: Prashant Bhushan

Justice delivery must be Constitutional

Related Articles

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

Theme

Stop Hate

Hate and Harmony in 2021

A recap of all that transpired across India in terms of hate speech and even outright hate crimes, as well as the persecution of those who dared to speak up against hate. This disturbing harvest of hate should now push us to do more to forge harmony.
Taliban 2021

Taliban in Afghanistan: A look back

Communalism Combat had taken a deep dive into the lives of people of Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. Here we reproduce some of our archives documenting the plight of hapless Afghanis, especially women, who suffered the most under the hardline regime.
2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.

Campaigns

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

Videos

Communalism

Hate, Arms, Shrine Takeovers: Is Hindutva extremism at its peak in Karnataka?

WATCH: In this SabrangIndia Exclusive show called 'Column 9', journalist & activist Shivasundar talks about the journey of Hindutva Extremism, from fringe groups to the center, in Karnataka, which is arguably empowered and emboldened by the legislative and judiciary, simultaneously.

Communalism

Hate, Arms, Shrine Takeovers: Is Hindutva extremism at its peak in Karnataka?

WATCH: In this SabrangIndia Exclusive show called 'Column 9', journalist & activist Shivasundar talks about the journey of Hindutva Extremism, from fringe groups to the center, in Karnataka, which is arguably empowered and emboldened by the legislative and judiciary, simultaneously.

IN FACT

Analysis

Stop Hate

Hate and Harmony in 2021

A recap of all that transpired across India in terms of hate speech and even outright hate crimes, as well as the persecution of those who dared to speak up against hate. This disturbing harvest of hate should now push us to do more to forge harmony.
Taliban 2021

Taliban in Afghanistan: A look back

Communalism Combat had taken a deep dive into the lives of people of Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. Here we reproduce some of our archives documenting the plight of hapless Afghanis, especially women, who suffered the most under the hardline regime.
2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.

Archives