Prashant Bhushan was found guilty of contempt of court and fined Re 1 (file)
New Delhi:
Lawyer and activist Prashant Bhushan has presented to the Supreme Court the right to appeal against his conviction last month in a criminal contempt case, arguing that there are possibilities for “arbitrary, retaliatory and pushy decisions” in criminal contempt cases because the court was the watered-down party.
Arguing that the right of appeal was a “fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution and also guaranteed by international law”, Mr. Bhushan said: “This acts as a vital safeguard against wrongful conviction and would truly allow the provision of truth as defending”. .
Bhushan, 63, who was found guilty of contempt of court, for tweets criticizing the Chief Justice of India SA Bobde and the high court, and fined Re 1, also said he wanted his guilty plea to be heard. by a larger and different court.
“In such cases, considering the fact that there is an inherent and unavoidable conflict of interest … and the fact that the freedom of the alleged contender is at stake, it is of the utmost importance that certain basic safeguards … that would reduce (though they would not ignore) possibilities of arbitrary, vindictive and overbearing decisions, “said his statement, according to the PTI news agency.
Under the current legal scheme, a person convicted of criminal contempt has the right to present a petition for review, but that declaration is decided by the court in the chambers, usually without listening to the opponent.
The lawyer had been convicted in a criminal contempt case involving two tweets, one of which said that four former chief judges had played a role in destroying democracy in India over the past six years.
The court asked for an unconditional apology, arguing that freedom of expression was not absolute. “She can do hundreds of good things, but that does not give her a license to commit ten crimes,” the court said.
The court also cited Mr. Bhushan’s high position in the legal community, saying: “If it had been someone else, it would be easier to ignore.”
Bhushan declined to apologize for his comments, arguing that he did not foresee any “substantial change” in his position and said his tweets were “the fulfillment of the highest duty”.
Open criticism is necessary to “safeguard democracy and its values,” he had said, adding that he would happily accept the punishment.
At his hearing, Bhushan’s lawyer, Rajiv Dhavan, argued that the Supreme Court should and should take extreme criticism as its “shoulders are broad enough.” Attorney General KK Venugopal also opposed the punishment.
“Bhushan’s tweets seek to improve the administration of justice … Let democracy continue in this case when it has exercised its freedom of expression … It will be greatly appreciated if the court leaves it that way,” he had said.
Bhushan had previously expressed regret in another contempt case in which he said that half of India’s 16 top judges were corrupt. The comment was made during an interview with Tehelka magazine in 2009.
With input from PTI
.
