Nupur Sharma case: AG declines consent for contempt against ex-judge, 2 lawyers
Former Delhi HC judge SN Dhingra, former additional solicitor general Aman Lekhi and senior advocate K Rama Kumar spoke against the comments made by the SC in an open court in the Nupur Sharma case
Attorney General KK Venugopal has declined consent to initiate criminal contempt charges against a former Delhi high court judge and two senior advocates who openly criticised observations passed by the Supreme Court while turning down a plea by suspended Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokesperson Nupur Sharma, in which she urged to club all criminal cases filed across the country over her alleged derogatory remarks on Prophet Mohammad.

The three persons – former Delhi HC judge SN Dhingra, former additional solicitor general (ASG) Aman Lekhi and senior advocate K Rama Kumar – in an interview spoke against the comments made by the SC in an open court, terming the observations “irresponsible” and “unfair”.
“I find that the statements made by the three persons are in the realm of fair comment on a hearing conducted by the Supreme Court,” Venugopal said while responding to a request received earlier this month from lawyer CR Jaya Sukin, demanding criminal contempt case against the three.
The former judge and two senior lawyers made the statements in connection with a July 1 observation by an SC bench of justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala, who blamed Sharma’s “loose tongue” for the incidents of violence following her remarks, which included the beheading of a tailor in Udaipur last month.
“She is single handedly responsible for what is happening in the country...her loose tongue has set the entire country on fire,” the bench said. The court even demanded her to apologise to the nation and wondered why she has not been arrested so far.
Reacting to these proceedings, the retired judge said that such comments should not have been made and if judges were so keen to make comments, they should join politics. The two others also said that it was unfair on the part of the court to make such comments; their responses were widely circulated in the media.
Also Read:‘SC remarks on Nupur not in sync with judicial ethos’: Ex-HC judges, veterans
“The statements (by the three persons) are not vituperative or abusive nor are they likely to interfere with the administration of justice by the Supreme Court of India... The Supreme Court in a large number of judgments has held that fair and responsible criticism of judicial proceedings would not constitute contempt of Court,” the AG said in a written communication on Wednesday.
In his view, the AG said the statements of the three persons were neither made with malice, nor were they a deliberate and motivated attempt to tarnish the image of the judiciary.
“All three persons made irreparable injury to Indian judiciary and the nation by their unparliamentary statements and derogatory remarks,” lawyer Sukin said in his complaint.
For initiating contempt proceedings in the Supreme Court under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, one is required to obtain the consent of the Attorney General under Rule 3(c) of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of Supreme Court, 1975.
A similar request to initiate contempt proceedings against news media website ‘OpIndia’, for carrying derogatory remarks against SC judges in the Nupur Sharma case, is pending consideration with the Attorney General. The complaint was filed by Trinamool Congress member Saket Gokhale on July 3.
Incidentally, justice Dhingra, against whom the AG declined to comment, was among 117 signatories who wrote an open letter condemning the SC remarks on Nupur Sharma.
The signatories, which included 15 former high court judges, 77 bureaucrats (including former DGPs) and 25 army veterans, sought recall of the observations and wrote, “In the annals of judiciary, the unfortunate comments have no parallel and are indelible scar on justice system of the largest democracy. Urgent rectification steps are called for as these have potentially serious consequences on democratic values and security of the country.”