E-Paper
SC to hear 10-year-old contempt case against Prashant Bhushan on August 4
The apex court had issued a fresh contempt notice against the same lawyer this week for his tweets directed against the judiciary and the present CJI which is listed for hearing on August 5.
The Supreme Court on Friday fixed hearing on a decade-old contempt case against advocate Prashant Bhushan on August 4 indicating that it would not allow his father and senior advocate Shanti Bhushan to be joined as a party in the proceeding. The apex court had issued a fresh contempt notice against the same lawyer this week for his tweets directed against the judiciary and the present CJI which is listed for hearing on August 5.
Bhushan faced contempt over an interview given to Tehelka magazine in September 2009 where he had said that half of the last 16 CJIs were corrupt. His father intervened in the case bringing out evidence against the CJIs in a sealed cover and offering to go to jail if his son was punished for contempt. The contempt plea against Bhushan was moved by senior advocate Harish Salve who assisted the Court as amicus curiae (friend of the Court).
The hearing on the contempt petition started in January 2010 and was last heard on May 2, 2012. When the matter was taken up after a gap of 8 years by a three-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, the Bhushan camp requested the Court to put off hearing in the case till physical court resumes.
Shanti Bhushan who appeared through video conferencing told the bench, “I find it very hard to address the Court through video conferencing. This matter has waited for 10 years. It can wait for a few more weeks till physical court hearing resumes.”
But the Court bluntly put to him, “You are too much senior to be impleaded (joined as party) in this case. It’s a suo moto contempt petition. We are not impleading you.” The former law minister insisted that a decision to not implead him should be taken after hearing his application. The bench replied, “Your application repeats what is stated by your son. You have said, ‘I’m ready to go to jail if he is punished’. All this argument is made out of love and affection. We understand our responsibility.”
For Prashant Bhushan, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan submitted to the Court that his case records were at Kasauli and cannot be procured. He requested for time to prepare on the question of having a Constitution Bench to hear the matter. He also raised doubts on Salve leading the contempt when he has not been officially appointed as amicus in the contempt case.
The bench, also comprising Justices BR Gavai and Krishna Murari, said, “We will give you time as per your satisfaction. At least, let us start hearing it.” Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal, another contemnor in this case, said, “This is not a matter where something impending is going to happen, unlike any demolition matter. This hearing can wait for some more time. It has waited for 10 years.”
The bench remarked, “Through the virtual court, we are hearing all matters, including constitution bench cases. We will hear you all patiently.” The Court posted the matter on August 4 stating that it would like Salve to assist the Court on the next date.
