Hear the news
The Supreme Court has convicted Prashant Bhushan in a contempt case. The court, in its judgment, blamed Prashant Bhushan for contempt of court and said that the court will sentence him on August 20 on the matter.
Supreme Court holds lawyer Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt of court for his alleged tweets on CJI and his four predecessors. The Court to hear the arguments on sentence against him on August 20. pic.twitter.com/4IUx7W0Wqj
– ANI (@ANI) August 14, 2020
Let me tell you that senior advocate Prashant Bhushan had tweeted against the Supreme Court of India and Chief Justice SA Bobde, on which the court was taking action with automatic cognizance, on which today a three-judge bench has given this decision. It was presided over by Justice Arun Mishra.
On 27 June, Prashant Bhushan took one tweet from his Twitter handle against the Supreme Court and another tweet against Chief Justice SA Bobde. On July 22, Prashant Bhushan received a notice from the Supreme Court.
Prashant Bhushan wrote in his first tweet that when future historians will see how democracy has been eradicated in India in the last six years without any formal emergency, they will specifically question the Supreme Court's involvement in this destruction and Will ask about the role of Chief Justice.
Earlier, advocate Prashant Bhushan defended two tweets that allegedly defamed the court. He said that those tweets were about his personal level of conduct against the judges and they do not obstruct the administration of justice. The court had on July 22 issued a show cause notice to Prashant Bhushan in this case.
While completing the hearing, the bench dismissed the application filed separately to withdraw the July 22 order. Under this order, the notice was issued, commencing contempt proceedings on two tweets allegedly defaming the judiciary.
The bench did not agree with senior counsel Dushyant Dave's argument that Bhushan was appearing during the hearing that the separate application objected to the manner in which the contempt process was initiated without taking the opinion of Attorney General KK Venugopal and referred it to another bench. To be sent to