NDLI: in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr. Vs. in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr.

in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr. Vs. in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr.

Content Provider: Supreme Court of India

Please Log-in to view this content

If you are not a registered user, please register first and then use the e-mail id and password to log-in.

Advisory jurisdiction

Arbitration petition

Civil miscellaneous petition

Contempt petition civil

Contempt petition criminal

Criminal appeal

Criminal miscellaneous petition

Curative petition Criminal

Curative petition civil

Death reference case

Disciplinary jurisdiction

Election petition civil

Habeas corpus petition

Miscellaneous application

Review petition civil

Review petition criminal

Special leave petition civil

Special leave petition criminal

Special reference case

Suo moto contempt petition civil

Suo moto contempt petition criminal

Re : Vijay Kurle & Ors. Vs. Re:

in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr. Vs. in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr.

in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr. Vs. in Re:

Suo moto transfer petition civil

Suo moto transfer petition criminal

Suo moto writ petition civil

Suo moto writ petition criminal

Tax reference case

Transfer petition civil

Transfer petition criminal

Transferred case civil

Transferred case criminal

Writ petition civil

Writ petition criminal

in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr. Vs. in Re: Prashant Bhushan and Anr.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Contempt of Court – Criminal Contempt of Court
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case Type	Suo Moto Contempt Petition
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Others
Headnote	Contempt of Court – Criminal Contempt of Court – In suo motu proceedings, Contemnor (an advocate) held guilty by Supreme Court – Court granted time to Contemnor to make unconditional apology, if he so desired – Contemnor filed supplementary statement reiterating that his statements in twitter were bonafide and pleaded truth as valid defence – Held: The twin requirement for considering the truth as valid defence, as per s. 13 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, is that such defence is in public interest and the request for invoking such defence is bona fide – In the facts of the case, the defence taken cannot be said to be either in public interest or bonafide, rather the Contemnor has indulged in making reckless allegations further aggravating the contempt – Even after conviction order, no remorse expressed nor apology submitted – A simple warning is not going to suffice in the present case – Duly balancing the factors as to the offender, offence and convicting judgment and the defence taken and in view of conduct of the contemnor, showing magnanimity, the Court, instead of imposing severe punishment, sentenced the contemnor with a nominal fine of Rs. 1/- – On default the Contemnor to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months and further be debarred from participating in Supreme Court for a period of 3 years. Judiciary – Though a fair criticism of judgment is permissible in law, a person cannot exceed the right u/Art.19(1)(a) to scandalize the institution – Constitution of India – Art.19(1)(a). Judiciary – If a scathing attack is made on the judges, it would become difficult for them to work fearlessly and with the objectivity of approach to the issues – The judgment can be criticized – However, motives to the Judges need not be attributed, as it brings administration of justice into disrepute – Administration of Justice. Advocates / Legal Profession – Lawyers, as a class, are looked by the public as intelligentsia. Constitution of India – Art.19(1)(a) – Free Speech is part of Art. 19(1)(a) – However, it cannot be said that while exercising power u/Art.129, the Court is interfering with the rights under Art.19(1)(a) – Supreme Court being a court of record can punish for contempt – Free Speech is essential to democracy, but it cannot denigrate one of the institutions of the democracy. Constitution of India – Art.129 – While exercising powers u/ Art.129, the Court will have to strike a balance between the right u/ Art.19(1)(a) and restrictions under Art.19(2) – Constitution of India – Art.19(1)(a) and 19(2). Advocates / Legal Profession – Role and duty of – Held: Lawyers’ noble profession will lose all its significance and charm and dignity if the lawyers are permitted to make any malicious, scandalous and scurrilous allegations against the institution of which they are part – Lawyers are supposed to be fearlessly independent and robust but at the same time respectful to the institution. Judiciary – Interference with judicial process – Release of statement to press in advance – Held: In a sub judice matter, releasing statement to the press in advance is an act of impropriety and has the effect of interfering with the judicial process and the fair decision making and is clearly an attempt to coerce the decision of the Court by the influence of newspaper and media, which cannot be said to be conducive for fair administration of justice and would further tantamount to undue interference in the independent judicial making process which is the very foundation of institution of administration of justice – Administration of Justice. Contempt of Court – Criminal contempt – Apology – Held: The Court has to be satisfied as to the genuineness of the apology to make an order that contemnor has purged himself of the contempt. Administration of Justice – It is not expected of a person who is a part of the system of administration of justice and who owes a duty to the said system, to make tweets capable of shaking the confidence of general public and further making wild allegations in affidavit thereby further attempting to malign the institution. Rule of Law – Supremacy of – Strong arm of the law strikes a blow on him who challenges supremacy of the rule of law by fouling its source and stream –Court has to act only where attack is beyond a permissible limit.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishna Murari
Neutral Citation	2020 INSC 489
Petitioner	In Re: Prashant Bhushan And Anr.
Respondent	In Re: Prashant Bhushan And Anr.
SCR	[2020] 8 S.C.R. 510
Judgement Date	2020-08-31
Case Number	1

Central Library (ISO-9001:2015 Certified)
Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
Kharagpur, West Bengal, India | PIN - 721302

See location in the Map
03222 282435
Mail: support@ndl.gov.in

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in