News By/Courtesy: Nandakishore A | 14 Sep 2020 23:41pm IST

HIGHLIGHTS

  • A Review Petition was filed by Advocate Prashant Bhushan against the judgment holding him guilty of contempt of court in regards to his tweets which criticized the judgement.
  • The review petition filed by the advocate calls for an open court hearing on the grounds that the judgment is filled with errors of law and fact which are apparent on the face of the record.
  • Along with the review petition, Bhushan has opined that Justice Arun Misha, who was the head of the bench which convicted him should have never heard the case in the first place due to bias

A Review Petition was filed in the Supreme Court on August 14 by Advocate Prashant Bhushan against the judgment holding him guilty of contempt of court in regards to his tweets which criticized the judiciary. Advocate Bhushan was held by the three-judge bench of the Supreme Court to be guilty of contempt and thereafter imposed a Rs 1 fine on him as punishment. He deposited the fine today while stating before the press that the deposition of the fine does not mean that he admits his guilt. The review petition filed by the advocate calls for an open court hearing on the grounds that the judgment is filled with errors of law and fact which are apparent on the face of the record.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan argues that he has a right to seek review of both the judgments, one of conviction and the other on sentencing passed against him even though both are independent stages of the criminal process as nothing in constitutional or statutory law restricts him from exercising such right. Along with the review petition, Bhushan has opined that Justice Arun Misha, who was the head of the bench which convicted him should have never heard the case in the first place due to the possibility of bias against him, thereby having a conflict of interest with the matter at hand. Bhushan stresses that the petition against him was not maintainable in the first instance itself as there was an absence of the Attorney General’s consent, which is a necessity in criminal contempt cases. He also points towards the fact that the natural justice principle has been violated as the mandatory requirements under the Act and the complementary Rules were infringed as well. He further believes that through the institution of suit against Bhushan and by not considering his defense of truth, the Supreme Court has effectively made all criticisms of the Supreme Court liable to come under an offense of criminal contempt.

 
This article does not intend to hurt the sentiments of any individual, community, sect, or religion, etcetera. This article is based purely on the author’s personal opinion and views in the exercise of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(A) and other related laws being enforced in India for the time being.

Section Editor: Pushpit Singh | 15 Sep 2020 19:42pm IST


Tags : Advocate Prashant Bhushan, Supreme Court, Contempt of Court, Rs 1 , Review Petition

Latest News







Copyright Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.