[Breaking] "Not An Attack Against Supreme Court": AG Declines Consent To Initiate Contempt Proceedings Against Swara Bhaskar, Petitioners Approach SG

Attorney General KK Venugopal has declined to grant consent to initiate contempt proceedings against actress Swara Bhaskar.

He has rejected an application filed by Advocate Anuj Saxena seeking sanction under Section 15 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 read with Rule 3 of Contempt proceedings of the Supreme Court 1975, for initiating Criminal contempt proceedings against actor Ms. Swara Bhaskar.

"The Statement in the first part appears to me a factual one and is a perception of a speaker. The comments refers to the Judgment of Supreme Court and is not an attack on the institution. This does not offer any comment on the Supreme Court itself or say anything that would scandalise or lower the authority of the Supreme Court". 

"The Second Statement is a vague statement not related to any particular Court and something which is so general that no one would take any serious note of this statement . I do not think that this is a case where the offence of scandalising of Court or lowering the authority of the Court would arise", AG stated in his Order.

The petition alleges that she scandalized the court by saying "courts are not sure if they believe in the constitution" while addressing a conference "artists against communalism" at Mumbai in February 2020.

According to the petition, Bhaskar said: "we are living in a country where the SC states in a judgment that demolition of Babri Masjid was unlawful and in the same judgement rewards the same people who brought down the mosque".

The plea alleged "objectionable statement" made by Bhaskar is reproduced in the petition as :

"We are living in a country where the Supreme Court of our country states that the demolition of Babri masjid was unlawful and in the same judgment rewards the same people who brought down the mosque."

"We are ruled by a government that doesn't believe in our Constitution we are ruled by police forces that do not believe in the constitution it seems we are now in a situation where our courts are not sure whether they believe in the constitution or not what then do we do and it seems to me that as everyone has said that path is clear to its and it has been shown to us by you all whoever of you all have been part of the protest by the students by the women and by the citizen protestors it is to resist"

It is alleged that her statements were not only a "cheap stunt of publicity" but also a deliberate attempt to turn masses to revolt against the Supreme Court.

"The alleged contemnor statements intends to incite feeling of no-confidence amongst the public with respect to the proceedings of the Hon'ble Court and integrity of the Hon'ble Judges of the Apex Court of India", states the Petition filed by Adv. Anuj Saxena, Prakash Sharma & Mahek Maheshwari on behalf of Usha Shetty.

Being unsatisfied with the reasons provided by the AGI the petitioner has approached theSolicitor General of India as under rule 3 (c) both Attorney General & Solicitor General can provide the consent

Click Here To Download Order

[Read Order]

Click Here To Download Application Filed Before SG

[Read Application Filed Before SG]