E-Paper
Prashant Bhushan case: Spotlight on AG’s role after hearing
Attorney General (AG) KK Venugopal on Thursday appeared in his personal capacity before the Supreme Court bench on Thursday and argued the judges shouldn’t impose any punishment on Prashant Bhushan.
Senior advocates on Thursday expressed concern over Attorney General (AG) KK Venugopal not being heard in detail during the Prashant Bhushan contempt-of-court hearings in the Supreme Court.
Venugopal, 89 — whose consent, which is otherwise required, was not obtained before the matter was taken up by the Supreme Court and who was not heard by the court during the contempt hearings — appeared in his personal capacity before the bench on Thursday and argued the judges shouldn’t impose any punishment on Bhushan.
The activist-lawyer was found guilty of contempt of court for two tweets on August 14.
“The Attorney General (AG) is the pre-eminent member of the Bar and generations of judges have known and understood the high constitutional authority of that office. The manner in which he was ignored for four-and-a-half hours during the conviction hearing and then interrupted repeatedly today by the presiding judge is a slight against the entire Bar. Under the Constitution, the AG doesn’t need anybody’s permission to appear -- the fact that the present incumbent is a gentleman should not be taken as a sign of weakness,’’ said senior advocate Gopal Shankarnarayanan, who was following the proceedings of the court.
Other lawyers said they were glad that Venugopal spoke up on the matter and tried to argue against his sentencing. “I am relieved the AG has appeared before the court now, and has taken a stand which befits his position,’’ said senior advocate Anjana Prakash.
“On the first hearing, he sat there for four hours and he wasn’t heard,’’ said Dushyant Dave, senior advocate and one of the lawyers appearing for Bhushan. In court, Dave cited the Contempt of Court Act of 1972, which makes it mandatory for the AG to give his consent to a contempt petition in writing.
Also read: Law has to be fair and balanced: Congress on Prashant Bhushan contempt case
“I requested the court twice to hear him but they didn’t,’’ said Dave. “Fortunately for the country , the AG made himself heard but the way they treated him was a grave miscarriage of justice. Mr Venugopal is one of the most respected, knowledgeable and wise lawyers in the country today. Any court would have deferred to his assistance and advice.’’
Venugopal has been practising since the 1950s and was appointed additional solicitor general by Prime Minister Morarji Desai after 1977. He was appointed AG in 2017. When the single-page order in the case heard by the justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari was published on Thursday evening, the record of proceedings mentioned all lawyers who appeared but for Venugopal.
Senior advocate Chander Uday Singh, who was appearing for activists such as Aruna Roy in the case, contended that the bench did not give Venugopal a fair hearing. “I think it was improper of the court of having called the AG, having issued him notice, not to give him fair hearing,” Singh said.
In court on Thursday, the three-judge bench cut short the AG’s arguments and said its judgment of August 14 will not be reconsidered, and that the AG should not make arguments on the merits of the case. The bench later gave Bhushan 3-4 days to reconsider his stand.
