Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Thursday asked Attorney General K.K. Venugopal to assist the court in the <keyword id="9820120" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="2009-contempt-case">2009 contempt case</keyword> against Advocate <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> for his remarks in the Tehelka magazine. A bench comprising Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna directed that the case record of the 2009 contempt case should be sent to AG. Senior advocate <keyword id="377410" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Rajeev-Dhavan">Rajeev Dhavan</keyword>, representing Bhushan, submitted before the bench that in the previous hearing the AG had shown inclination to assist the court in the matter, and thus he should be impleaded as an amicus curiae. The bench replied that the AG would be impleaded in the case in accordance with the Rule 10 of the Supreme Court Rules, and the decision to appoint him as an amicus-curiae in the matter will be taken later. Dhavan contended before the bench there are more questions of law, which should be framed in the case, as 10 questions have already been framed. He added that the court wanted to add three more. After a brief hearing on the matter, the bench said it will take up the case in the week commencing from October 12. On August 25, <keyword id="1014396" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Justice-Arun-Mishra">Justice Arun Mishra</keyword> had directed that the case be placed before another bench, as he was days away from demitting office. The Supreme Court had observed that it is not a question of punishment only, it is a question of faith in the institution. A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had told Dhavan that he must ponder that people come to court for relief, and when that faith is shaken then there is a problem. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for journalist Tarun Tejpal, contended before the bench that people come to court for justice and relief. "We will come and go but the institution exists forever. We must protect the integrity of the institution," Sibal had submitted. The bench had then said the matter to be listed on September 10 before an appropriate bench by the Chief Justice. "I am short of time. I am demitting office," Justice Mishra had observed, who retired on September 2. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/banks/news/supreme-court-inclined-to-excuse-moratorium-interest-on-interest-as-it-gives-the-government-another-two-weeks-to-file-detailed-affidavit/articleshow/78033878.cms">Supreme Court ‘inclined’ to excuse moratorium interest on interest as it gives the government another two weeks to file detailed affidavit</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-tests-prashant-bhushans-resolve-with-a-1-fine-for-critical-tweets/articleshow/77846880.cms">Supreme Court tests Prashant Bhushan's resolve with a ₹1 fine for 'critical' tweets</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-refers-prashant-bhushans-2009-contempt-to-another-bench/articleshow/77736957.cms">Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench</a>

Supreme Court ropes in Attorney General to help in 2009 contempt case against Bhushan

During hearing a 2009 contempt case against advocate <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword>, the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Tuesday observed that it is not only question of punishment but also faith in the institution that required detailed hearing and referred the matter to an appropriate bench. The contempt case is in connection with Bhushan's comments on the judiciary during an interview to the Tehelka magazine in 2009. A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra told senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing Bhushan, that he must ponder that people come to court for relief, and when that faith is shaken then there is a problem. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for journalist Tarun Tejpal, contended before the bench that people come to court for justice and relief. "We will come and go but the institution exists forever. We must protect the integrity of the institution," submitted Sibal. The bench said let the matter be listed on September 10 before an appropriate bench by the Chief Justice. "I am short of time. I am demitting office," Justice Mishra observed, who is scheduled to retire on September 2, citing the matter requires detailed hearing. During the hearing, the top court observed that in this case in addition to the Attorney General, the assistance of some amicus is also required. Dhavan asked the bench to issue notice to the Attorney General. "Let us leave this to an appropriate bench," Justice Mishra noted. Dhavan argued that the important question is how much of the court's free speech jurisprudence could be read into suo moto contempt powers? SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/telecom/news/airtel-wants-to-increase-data-prices-to-100-per-gb-sunil-mittal-asks-subscribers-to-prepare-to-pay-a-lot-more/articleshow/77734318.cms">Airtel wants to increase data prices to ₹100 per GB, Sunil Mittal asks subscribers to ‘prepare to pay a lot more’</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/india-startup-founders-are-opting-for-money-in-the-bank-instead-of-high-valuations-as-they-look-to-survive-this-pandemic/articleshow/77733965.cms">India's startup founders are opting for money in the bank instead of high valuations as they look to survive this pandemic</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/telecom/news/without-huawei-and-zte-in-india-airtel-and-vodafone-ideas-battle-against-jio-to-become-tougher/articleshow/77734889.cms">Without Huawei and ZTE in India, Airtel and Vodafone-Idea's battle against Jio to become tougher</a>

Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing the Muslim parties in the Ram-Janmbhoomi-Dabri masjid land dispute case, tore up a pictorial map showing the exact birthplace of Lord Ram during the hearings in the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The reference to the pictorial map showing the exact birthplace of Lord Ram at the disputed site in Ayodhya by Senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing the All India Hindu Mahasabha, was objected to by Dhavan. Dhavan then asked the bench as to what he should do with it, to which the bench said that he can shred it into pieces. Dhavan then tore the pictorial map, provided by the counsel for All India Hindu Mahasabha, in the courtroom. During the arguments, Singh referred to various aspects of the <keyword id="48834" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Allahabad-High-Court">Allahabad High Court</keyword> judgement and said there has been long faith and belief on the part of Hindus with regard to the scared nature of the birthplace of Lord Ram. Dhavan had also objected to Singh's attempt to refer to a book on Ayodhya, written by former IPS officer <keyword id="207684" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kishore-Kunal">Kishore Kunal</keyword>, saying such attempts should be disallowed. The bench had then asked Singh to proceed with the hearing saying, "Mr Dhavan, we have taken note of your objection."

Lawyer tears up pictoral map as courtroom drama peaks on the last day of Ayodhya arguments

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday framed a larger question during the hearing of the 2009 contempt case against advocate <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword>. It asked when could corruption allegations against the judges be made public? A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Krishna Murari posed the following questions -under what circumstances, public statements in connection with corruption of judges can be made, and what procedure should be adopted if such statements of corruption were made in public against sitting as well as retired judges? In 2009, Bhushan, in an interview to Tehleka magazine alleged that at least half of the last 16 Chief Justices of India were corrupt. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing journalist Tarun Tejpal, sought a quietus to the case. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing Prashant Bhushan, also agreed on closure on the case, but argued that one cannot go to the press, is a bad decision and needs a review. The bench noted that putting a quietus is not the issue and cited the questions. "We want to hear, because if the questions are left then it will not be better for later on", noted the bench. Dhavan contended that questions are meaningful, and they should be considered by a larger bench. Justice Mishra replied that this aspect would also be considered. The top court adjourned the matter till August 24. On August 10, the Supreme Court had said that it will hear in detail whether any comment on corruption against judges tantamounts to contempt of court or not, adding that it will hear the 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan. A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had said that it has decided to hear whether the remarks made by Bhushan against the higher judiciary in a Tehelka magazine interview is "per se contempt". "Before reaching to any finding whether the statement made as to 'Corruption' would per se amount to Contempt of Court, the matter is required to be heard", said the bench. Earlier, the apex court had said it would go on to hear the case if "we do not accept the explanation/apology of Bhushan". On August 4, the Supreme Court had said it had not received the apology submitted by Bhushan and reserved its order in the 2009 contempt case against him. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/tweets-criticising-indias-supreme-court-get-tagged-as-hate-speech-and-incurs-the-judges-wrath-twitter-caught-in-the-crossfire/articleshow/77107560.cms">Tweets criticising India's Supreme Court get tagged as 'hate speech' and incur the judge's wrath ⁠— Twitter caught in the crossfire</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-holds-prashant-bhushan-guilty-of-contempt-of-court-punishment-to-be-announced-on-august-20/articleshow/77539437.cms">Supreme Court wields the ‘iron hand’ in holding Prashant Bhushan guilty for tweets critical of judiciary and chief justice</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-to-hear-2009-comtempt-case-against-lawyer-prashant-bhushan/articleshow/77458477.cms">Supreme Court to hear 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan</a>

2009 Prashant Bhushan contempt case back in the spotlight as Supreme Court poses new questions

<ul><li>The top court scheduled the matter for further hearing on August 17.</li><li>Last week, the apex court had said it would go on to hear the case if "we do not accept the explanation/apology of Bhushan".</li><li>On August 4, the Supreme Court had said it had not received the apology submitted by Bhushan and reserved its order in the 2009 contempt case against him.</li></ul>The Supreme Court on Monday said that it will hear in detail whether any comment on corruption against judges tantamount to contempt of court or not, adding that it will hear the 2009 contempt case against <keyword id="1760256" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="lawyer-Prashant-Bhushan">lawyer Prashant Bhushan</keyword>. A bench headed by <keyword id="1014396" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Justice-Arun-Mishra">Justice Arun Mishra</keyword> said that it has decided to hear whether the remarks made by <keyword id="9730773" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="senior-advocate-prashant-bhushan">Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan</keyword> against the higher judiciary in a Tehelka magazine interview is "per se contempt". The top court scheduled the matter for further hearing on August 17. Last week, the apex court had said it would go on to hear the case if "we do not accept the explanation/apology of Bhushan". On August 4, the Supreme Court had said it had not received the apology submitted by Bhushan and reserved its order in the 2009 contempt case against him. A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and <keyword id="333383" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Krishna-Murari">Krishna Murari</keyword> had said: "We have heard the counsel for the parties at some length. Explanation/apology submitted by Prashant Bhushan/Respondent No. 1 and Tarun Tejpal/Respondent No. 2 have not been received so far." The bench added: "In case we do not accept the explanation/apology, we will hear the matter. We reserve the order." In an earlier hearing, taking up the 2009 contempt of court case, the apex court observed that there is a "thin line between free speech and contempt", adding that the issue now is how to save the system's grace and bring the matter to an end as well. The bench asked Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing Bhushan, to suggest ways to resolve this matter. Justice Mishra had told Dhavan: "Can you suggest some way to avoid this rigmarole? You can resolve it." In response, Dhavan had said that Bhushan had already provided an explanation on the matter. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/these-are-the-tabletop-airports-in-india-two-of-them-have-seen-major-plane-crashes-in-last-10-years/articleshow/77427972.cms">These are the tabletop airports in India – two of them have seen major plane crashes in last 10 years</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/how-karan-bajaj-sold-his-less-than-18-month-old-startup-white-hat-jr-to-byjus/articleshow/77415329.cms">A WhatsApp message, six weeks of talks and a $300 million deal – how Karan Bajaj sold his less than 18-month old startup White Hat Jr to Byju’s</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/mukesh-ambani-is-now-the-worlds-fourth-richest-person-after-he-beat-louis-vuitton-owner-bernard-arnault/articleshow/77431776.cms">Mukesh Ambani is now the world’s fourth-richest person after he beat Louis Vuitton owner Bernard Arnault</a>

Supreme Court to hear 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan

Activist-lawyer <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> Tuesday urged the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> to give a "statesman like message" by recalling the verdict convicting him for the contempt of the court for his two tweets against the judiciary. Attorney General K K Venugopal also asked the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra to forgive Bhushan, who has been refusing to tender unconditional apology for the tweets. He said Bhushan should "withdraw all statements and express regret". The bench, which on August 20 had granted time till Monday to Bhushan to reconsider his "defiant statement" and tender "unconditional apology" for the contemptuous tweets, concluded hearing on the quantum of punishment to be awarded to the activist lawyer. "Though Attorney General suggested reprimand but that will be extreme. Don't make Prashant Bhushan a martyr. Don't do it. He has not committed murder or theft," senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Bhushan, submitted before the bench, also comprising Justices B R Gavai and Krishna Murari. Referring to the supplementary statement tendered by Bhushan, his lawyer said that not only this case be closed but even the controversy has come to an end and "there should be a statesman like message" from the top court. "I make two suggestions. The convicting judgement should be recalled and no sentence should be imposed. I am making a statement on my client's behalf," Dhavan said. Referring to Bhushan's statements and his refusal to apologise, the bench asked Venugopal that mistakes were committed by all but they needed to be accepted and said that here Bhushan was not willing to accept that. "We have to be respectful to each other and tolerant. We are not separate from you (lawyers). We have also come from the bar. We are open to criticism but we cannot go in public," the bench said during the hearing. Justice Mishra, who is demitting office on September 2, said that judges cannot go to the press to speak their mind. "We are not carrying prejudice against anyone. Don't think we are not tolerating criticism. There are several contempt petitions pending but tell us has he been punished ever. It is painful to see such things happening at the time when I am demitting office," Justice Mishra said. The court, which granted 30 minutes to Bhushan to 'think over' his stand of not expressing regret over his tweets, later sought views of Dhavan on the punishment to be awarded to Bhushan in the contempt case. Dhavan said he did not support Venugopal's view that Bhushan be reprimanded as it will be an extreme punishment and moreover, he has not committed any murder or theft and any such punishment will make him "a martyr". Taking note of Bhushan's refusal to apologise, the bench commented as to what is wrong in apologising, is this word so bad. Venugopal said that judges were the third party in this case against whom the alleged statements have been made and the court has not heard them. "Why are such allegations being made in the first place," the bench asked. Judges cannot defend themselves, the bench observed and said that it is the Attorney General who will have to protect the system. "Reprimanding like 'don't do it again will not be correct," Venugopal said. Earlier in the day, the court granted 30 minutes to Bhushan to reconsider his stand after the Attorney General sought forgiveness for the activist-lawyer. He had refused to offer an apology to the Supreme Court for his two tweets against the judiciary, saying what he expressed represented his bona fide belief which he continued to hold. "Bhushan says the Supreme Court has collapsed, is it not objectionable," asked the bench. The court can speak through orders only and even in his affidavit, Bhushan has made disparaging remarks against the judiciary, the bench said. The court should warn him and take a compassionate view, Venugopal told the bench. When Bhushan does not think he did anything wrong then what is the point of giving him advice to not repeating it, the bench said. "A person should realize his mistake, we gave Bhushan time but he says he will not apologize," it said. The apex court on August 14 had held Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for his two derogatory tweets against the judiciary saying they cannot be said to be a fair criticism of the functioning of the judiciary made in the public interest. He faces simple imprisonment of up to six months or with a fine of up to Rs 2,000 or with both as punishment. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-gives-prashant-bhushan-final-30-minutes-to-reconsider-giving-apology/articleshow/77739151.cms">Supreme Court gives Prashant Bhushan final 30 minutes to reconsider giving apology</a> <a href="http://businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-refers-prashant-bhushans-2009-contempt-to-another-bench/articleshow/77736957.cms">Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench</a>

Prashant Bhushan asks Supreme Court to recall verdict as he faces imprisonment of up to six months or with a fine of up to ₹ 2,000

<ul><li>Activist and lawyer <keyword id="6368850" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> has rejected <keyword id="6360390" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="the-supreme-court">the Supreme Court</keyword>'s offer to delay the verdict on the Twitter case against him by another two to three days. </li><li>Bhushan told the bench that he does not wish to reconsider his statement or issue an apology.</li><li>The Supreme Court also rejected Bhushan's plea to defer the hearing in order to file a review plea against the verdict.</li><li>The Attorney General asked the bench to not punish Bhushan at all. </li><li>The bench asserted that it is not possible until Bhushan changes his stance and apologises. </li><li>Has been given another two to three days to reconsider his statement.</li></ul>Activist and lawyer Prashant Bhushan has been in a spot of trouble after two of his tweets made headlines for criticising the judiciary and the Chief Justice of India. India's top court ruled his comments to be in contempt of the court and rejected Bhushan's plea to defer the hearing in order to file a review against the verdict delivered on August 14. However, it also offered Bhushan two to three days to reconsider his position before rolling out the sentence — an offer that Bhushan refused but one that will be upheld nonetheless. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77107560" title="Tweets criticising India's Supreme Court get tagged as 'hate speech' and incur the judge's wrath ⁠— Twitter caught in the crossfire" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> The Attorney General (AG) told the judges that it would be tremendously helpful if Bhushan was given some time. However, Bushan responded saying that he doesn't believe time will change where he stands on the issue. "Statement I made was well thought out. It is unlikely that there will be any substantial change in my statement," he said. "As regards to giving time, I don't think it will serve any purpose," he added. Nonetheless, the court has deferred sentencing by another two to three days. The AG subsequently requested for Bhushan to not be punished at all. However, the court maintained that it cannot consider that request until Bhushan reconsiders his earlier stance and apologises for the tweets. Supreme Court rejects Bhushan's plea The Supreme Court also refused Bhushan's plea to defer the hearing that will decide his judgement. According to Justice BR Gavai, Bhushan can file a plea to review the case regardless of whether a sentence is delivered today or not. “Even if we punish you, it won’t be activated until the decision on review. We’ll be fair to you. We feel you are trying to avoid this bench,” said the <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1296327206453432321">Supreme Court</a> in its decision as Bhushan's representation, Dushyant Dave, pushed for the matter of punishment to be considered by a different set of judges. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77633203" title="Prashant Bhushan is seeking deferment of hearing on sentence until the Supreme Court considers the review plea" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> Sentencing Prashant Bhushan for critical tweets In rolling out its sentence in the case against Bhushan and his tweets, which were critical of India's judicial system, the bench noted that it has taken Bhushan's contributions — pro bono cases — into consideration. However, it added, "The fact you are doing many good things does not mean that your wrongs can be neutralised." The AG pointed out that he has a list of five Supreme Court judges saying that democracy has failed within the system. He also has extracts of statements from retired judges that can attest that there was corruption in higher in the judiciary. Large questions of the 2009 <keyword id="61723" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="contempt-case">contempt case</keyword> The Supreme Court said it would consider certain larger questions in the 2009 contempt case against Prashant Bhushan and journalist <keyword id="119513" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Tarun-Tejpal">Tarun Tejpal</keyword> as the issue before it has wide ramifications. The top court said it would like to hear arguments from the lawyers as to what should be the process which should be followed in contempt cases where allegations are being levelled against judges. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said it would like to hear the counsels on whether such statements can be made and the procedure to be adopted for dealing with them. The apex court in November 2009, had issued a contempt notice to Bhushan and Tejpal for allegedly casting aspersions on some sitting and former top court judges in an interview to a news magazine, Tehelka. Tejpal was the editor of the magazine. Bhushan told the court on Sunday that making corruption charges against the judges would not amount to contempt of court and mere utterance of corruption charge could not be contempt of court. The top court asked senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Bhushan, <keyword id="335945" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Shanti-Bhushan">Shanti Bhushan</keyword> and <keyword id="30182" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kapil-Sibal">Kapil Sibal</keyword> to address it on three issues— whether such statements can be made, in what circumstances they can be made and what is the procedure to be adopted with respect to sitting and retired judges. The bench, also comprising Justices B R Gavai and <keyword id="333383" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Krishna-Murari">Krishna Murari</keyword>, posted the matter for next hearing on August 24. Sibal, appearing for Tarun Tejpal, said the matter should be given quietus (discharged). The bench said that even the court wants to give the case a quietus but it there are certain questions which need consideration. (With PTI inputs) SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/tweets-criticising-indias-supreme-court-get-tagged-as-hate-speech-and-incurs-the-judges-wrath-twitter-caught-in-the-crossfire/articleshow/77107560.cms">Tweets criticising India's Supreme Court get tagged as 'hate speech' and incur the judge's wrath ⁠— Twitter caught in the crossfire</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-holds-prashant-bhushan-guilty-of-contempt-of-court-punishment-to-be-announced-on-august-20/articleshow/77539437.cms">Supreme Court wields the ‘iron hand’ in holding Prashant Bhushan guilty for tweets critical of judiciary and chief justice</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/2009-prashant-bhushan-case-back-in-the-spotlight-as-supreme-court-poses-questions-on-contempt/articleshow/77590293.cms">2009 Prashant Bhushan contempt case back in the spotlight as Supreme Court poses new questions</a>

You Searched For "Rajeev Dhavan" and got 7 results

Supreme Court ropes in Attorney General to help in 2009 contempt case against Bhushan

IANS

Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench

IANS

Lawyer tears up pictoral map as courtroom drama peaks on the last day of Ayodhya arguments

PTI

2009 Prashant Bhushan contempt case back in the spotlight as Supreme Court poses new questions

IANS

Supreme Court to hear 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan

IANS

Prashant Bhushan asks Supreme Court to recall verdict as he faces imprisonment of up to six months or with a fine of up to ₹ 2,000

PTI

Prashant Bhushan rejects Supreme Court's offer to delay sentence but is given two to three days to reconsider statement

Prabhjote Gill

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides