"Judiciary Ought to Reply for Criticism by Changing Its Course": Students From Across Country Seek Recall Of Prashant Bhushan Contempt Verdict [Read Letter]

They have asserted that fair criticism is a part of free speech and the Judiciary ought to nit take offense of the same but rather it must respond to the same by changing its course and restoring public faith.

"The judiciary ought to reply for criticism by restoration of public confidence. The judiciary ought to reply for criticism by changing its course. The judiciary ought not to charge for contempt when criticism arises out of anguish and love for justice, from a person aiding in profoundness of the same justice he asks for others," they wrote.

Expressing "firm criticism" on the contempt verdict the students stressed that to criticize the judge fairly, albeit fiercely, indeed is no crime but a "necessary right", twice blessed in a democracy.

Recalling the Top Court's remarks in Re S. Mulgaokar [AIR 1978 SC 727] that the Judges should not be "hypersensitive" even where distortions and criticisms overstep the limits, they wrote:

"The Supreme Court seems to have weak albeit broad shoulder for social media opinions. It feels scandalized for being fiercely criticized by one of its own whose real motive is for judicial reforms. There is only so much left to say that hasn't already been said by the charged person himself but the hope of imploring the Court is still prevalent among some of us."

The students have also expressed their dismay at three incidents that occurred during pendency of the contempt proceedings against Mr. Bhushan. They are:

• Recalling of 2009 contempt case and relisting it suddenly [SC To Hear Tomorrow 11-Year Old Contempt Case Against Prashant Bhushan]
• Deletion of case from Justice DY Chandrachud led bench regarding constitutional challenge on provisions of contempt [Listing Controversy In SC: Petition Challenging Contempt Law Removed From Bench Of Justices Chandrachud & KM Joseph]
• Suo-moto cognizance through a poor petition without sound legal reasoning on two tweets [SC Issues Contempt Notice To Advocate Prashant Bhushan Over His Tweets On Judiciary]

"All of these during a pandemic when marginalized and voiceless are awaiting justice in many cases raises our doubts on intention of the judiciary," they wrote.

On Aug 25, a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had reserved orders on the sentence in the contempt case over two tweets of Bhushan, after he refused to apologize. The Court will pronounce the sentence in the contempt case on tomorrow, August 31.

The SC verdict in the 2020 contempt case has drawn flak from various national and foreign Advocates bodies. Over 2000 lawyers, including noted Senior Advocates, have endorsed the statement of support for Bhushan.

The Executive Committee of the Bar Association of India also expressed its dismay at the Supreme Court verdict.

Bodies like Bar Association of India, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) have also criticized the verdict against Bhushan.

Click Here To Download Letter

Read Letter