[Prashant Bhushan Contempt Case On Two Tweets] AG KK Venugopal Urges Court Not To Punish Bhushan [LIVE UPDATES]

"I have not taken contempt against a single person in my judicial career. Balancing and restraint are issues" : Justice Mishra.

Dhavan refers to a judgment of Justice Arun Mishra as CJ of Calcutta HC which refrained from taking contempt against Mamata Banerjee for her remarks against judges.

Dhavan says that the balance of contempt power under Article 129 comes from Article 19 of the Constitution.

Justice Mishra says he agrees with Dhavan that the power to punish for contempt under Article 129 must be used sparingly and with restraint.

'Dr. Dhavan, don't worry about that. We don't mind fair criticism' : Justice Mishra tells Dhavan.

'When your lordships August 14 judgment reaches various academies, it will be severely criticized. Most of the judgment is 'cut-paste' from Vijay Kurle judgment and other judgments' : Dhavan.

"All these cases are pro bono.

So, please consider - is this persons simply attacking the court or is criticising for improving the administration of justice", Dhavan.

Dhavan continues to recount cases fought by Bhushan : Police reforms case, slum dwellers cases, gram nyayala case, RTI cases etc.

Dave refers to several Prashant Bhushan cases - coal scam, Orissa mining case, FCRA case (whether foreign funds can be used for political funding), powers of CVC, 2G case, SIT in high profile corruption cases etc.

'These proceedings have attracted more attention than the original tweets themselves, which are transitory", Dhavan.

'Your lordships must examine the person. Because that goes into the roots of the bona fides", Dhavan submits that the character and contributions of Bhushan

@pbhushan1

must be taken into account for the purpose of the sentence.

Dhavan says two factors are important for sentence. :

1. Nature of offence - there are already public discussions about the working of judiciary in recent times.

2. Nature of person/contemnor