Latest

SC Registers Suo Motu Contempt Case Against Rajdeep Sardesai For Tweets Against Judiciary

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday registered a suo motu contempt case towards journalist Rajdeep Sardesai for his tweets towards the judiciary. The SC registered the case following a petition filed by one Aastha Khurana by means of advocate Om Prakash Parihar underneath Article 129 of the Constitution to the Chief Justice of India for initiating contempt proceedings towards Sardesai. Also Read – WhatsApp Privacy Policy: ‘You May Be 2-3 Trillion Dollar Company But People Value Their Privacy More Than Your Money’, SC to WhatsApp, Facebook

The growth comes after Attorney General Ok Ok Venugopal on September 17, 2020, had declined his consent to provoke contempt motion towards Sardesai for a similar set of tweets. Also Read – Right To Protest Cannot Be Anytime And Everywhere, Says Supreme Court

“That the present contempt petition under Article 129 of the Constitution of India is being filed by the petitioner against the alleged contemnor/respondent for wilful disobedient comments passed on each and every decision/judgement passed by this court which leads to cause disrespect to the superior court of India in the minds of citizens of India,” the plea has mentioned. Also Read – SA Bobde Retirement: For First Time in 5 Years, CJI May Demit Office Without Successor. Here’s Why

The petition was filed on September 21, 2020 and it was registered as suo motu case on February 13. However, Article 129 of the Constitution states that the Supreme Court shall be a court docket of file and shall have all of the powers of such a court docket together with the ability to punish for contempt of itself.

Notably, a felony contempt of the Supreme Court is punishable with a advantageous of as much as Rs 2,000 and imprisonment of as much as six months.

The plea has mentioned that the highest court docket prior to now has handed varied landmark judgements and on every judgement, the alleged contemnor has handed varied disrespectful feedback and questioned the equity and credibility of the court docket.

The petitioner cited tweet by Sardesai, printed in August 2020, the place he had criticised the one-rupee penalty imposed on advocate Prashant Bhushan within the contempt of court docket; and one other tweet citing that the highest court docket can not debar any lawyer from observe.

The plea mentioned later this tweet was deleted by him, however it’s got large media publicity and has once more questioned the equity of the highest court docket, which is once more an enormous menace to the Judiciary.

Furthermore, the plea contended that it’s evident that Sardesai has disrespected the choice of the highest court docket with impunity. “The Respondent (Sardesai) has wilfully disobeyed the decision of this Hon’ble Court and their conduct is contumacious. Therefore, a serious view of the conduct of the Respondent is required to be taken for ensuring proper administration of justice”, mentioned the plea.

(With inputs from businesses)

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = “https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1&appId=178196885542208”; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));

$(document).ready(function(){
$(‘#commentbtn’).on(“click”,function(){
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1&appId=178196885542208”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));

$(“.cmntbox”).toggle();
});
});

Source link

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button