The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will hear in July a contempt plea against lawyer <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-issues-notice-to-lawyer-prashant-bhushan-on-contempt-plea-by-ag-and-centre-195507&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjBmbjvnbbhAhU56nMBHbMtBzcQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw0xivmSooHwEGXiWQZcN_lC">Prashant Bhushan </a>for tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted to the apex court fabricated documents of the high-powered selection panel on the appointment of interim CBI chief.

The plea was filed by Attorney General (AG) <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/kk-venugopal-appointed-new-attorney-general-of-india-17464&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjh25j6nbbhAhUt7nMBHXzQBhIQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw3o6LVbkl1miNunYxh0S0Ix">K K Venugopal</a> against the lawyer-activist for his February 1 tweets.

The matter came up for hearing before a bench of justices<a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/i-am-cool-says-lawyer-in-courtroom-exchange-during-prashant-bhushan-case-hearing-201992&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjPrNCWnrbhAhUJ7nMBHQamBuEQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw0Z96Jte6zn5_nPEIA8HghK"> Arun Mishra</a> and <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/prashant-bhushan-admits-in-supreme-court-he-made-genuine-mistake-in-his-tweets-on-fabricated-documents-201734&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjb4d-inrbhAhV98XMBHS93ABsQFggIMAE&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw0e6Aw_eWdZ_DlM1A8JLA-s">Navin Sinha</a> and the court said it would hear the case in July since both Venugopal and Bhushan were arguing in another matter before a Constitution bench.

On March 7, Bhushan had admitted in the apex court his “genuine mistake” in his<a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-issues-notice-to-lawyer-prashant-bhushan-on-contempt-plea-by-ag-and-centre-195507&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiUybmynrbhAhWD7nMBHSmEC0sQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw1wqzis3PoqPXhhzZ1FPB8K"> tweets</a> but had refused to tender an “unconditional apology” for seeking recusal of Justice Mishra from hearing the matter.

Bhushan in his tweets had said that the Centre appeared to have misled the top court and perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of the meeting of the high-powered selection committee, headed by the prime minister, in a matter related to the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as then interim CBI director.

Venugopal had earlier told the court that he would like to withdraw his contempt plea since Bhushan has made a statement that it was a “genuine mistake”.

He had also reiterated that he does not want any punishment for Bhushan in the case and the court should deal with the larger issue of whether lawyers and litigants can criticise the court proceedings in a matter, which is sub-judice, to influence public opinion.

However, the bench had told Venugopal, “You may or may not withdraw the petition against him (Bhushan) but you have raised a question and we will decide it”.

The court had said it would also deal with the larger issue of whether a lawyer can make comments about court proceedings in a sub-judice matter.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had told the bench on March 7 that he would seek instructions on whether to press the separate contempt plea filed by the Centre against Bhushan in the wake of the AG’s stand that he would like to withdraw his contempt petition.

The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will hear in July a contempt plea against lawyer Prashant Bhushan for tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted to the apex court fabricated documents of the high-powered selection panel on the appointment of interim CBI chief.

The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will hear in July a contempt plea against lawyer Prashant Bhushan for tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted to the apex court fabricated documents of the high-powered selection panel on the appointment of interim CBI chief. The plea was filed by Attorney General (AG) K K Venugopal against the lawyer-activist for his February 1 tweets. The matter came up for hearing before a bench of justices Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha and the court said it would hear the case in July since both Venugopal and Bhushan were arguing in another matter before a Constitution bench. On March 7, Bhushan had admitted in the apex court his “genuine mistake” in his tweets but had refused to tender an “unconditional apology” for seeking recusal of Justice Mishra from hearing the matter. Bhushan in his tweets had said that the Centre appeared to have misled the top court and perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of the meeting of the high-powered selection committee, headed by the prime minister, in a matter related to the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as then interim CBI director. Venugopal had earlier told the court that he would like to withdraw his contempt plea since Bhushan has made a statement that it was a “genuine mistake”. He had also reiterated that he does not want any punishment for Bhushan in the case and the court should deal with the larger issue of whether lawyers and litigants can criticise the court proceedings in a matter, which is sub-judice, to influence public opinion. However, the bench had told Venugopal, “You may or may not withdraw the petition against him (Bhushan) but you have raised a question and we will decide it”. The court had said it would also deal with the larger issue of whether a lawyer can make comments about court proceedings in a sub-judice matter. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had told the bench on March 7 that he would seek instructions on whether to press the separate contempt plea filed by the Centre against Bhushan in the wake of the AG’s stand that he would like to withdraw his contempt petition.

Supreme Court to hear contempt plea against Prashant Bhushan in July

The hearing in the Supreme Court during lawyer Prashant Bhushan's application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from adjudicating contempt plea filed against him by the Attorney General saw some heated arguments on Thursday.

The case was being heard by a bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha. Senior lawyer Dushyant Dave, appearing for Prashant Bhushan, referred to some earlier orders passed by Justice Mishra, including the one in which the apex court had made observations about lawyers going to the media on sub-judice cases, and said this has given rise to an apprehension in Bhushan's mind.

"Judges think independently. It is a matter of common knowledge that in some matters, some judges may have strict views while other judges will have different views. This is the beauty of this institution," Justice Sinha observed.

Dave said apprehension has to be seen from the mind of litigants and not from the mind of judges. "Please hear our application (seeking recusal). There are reasons in it."

To this, the bench told Dave, "Sorry, we are not with you. We should not express any opinion on this kind of application. If you want, we can pass reasoned order and then it will reflect many things. We are telling you."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, which has also filed a separate contempt plea against Bhushan, referred to earlier orders passed by the apex court and said seeking recusal of judges has become a "pattern".

He said earlier also attempts were made to have two out of three judges recuse from hearing the pleas seeking probe into the death of special CBI judge B H Loya, who was hearing the high-profile Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case.

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for some social activists who have sought to intervene in the case, said Mehta has no locus to argue in the matter as the Centre's contempt plea against Bhushan was not maintainable.

"He (Mehta) appears in court, stands up and argues without being a party in the case," Dhavan said.

"Mr Dhavan, please maintain cool," the bench said. To this, the senior lawyer replied, "I am cool, My Lord. My biggest advantage is, I don't have blood pressure."

"Please check your blood pressure anyway", Justice Mishra commented.

During the hearing, Bhushan admitted in the court that he had made a "genuine mistake" by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted in the apex court fabricated documents of the high-powered selection panel on appointment of interim CBI director.

Advocate Dave expressed the inclination on behalf of his client to withdraw an application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from hearing the contempt plea filed by Attorney General K K Venugopal against the activist lawyer.

When the bench said the application be withdrawn with an unconditional apology, Dave said he will tender the same on behalf of Bhushan.

However, when the bench sought Bhushan's own view, he said he was not inclined to tender an unconditional apology as the application filed by him was bona fide.

Taking note of his statement, the bench said in its order, "We make it clear that there is no reason for recusal and we will deal with it." The bench has posted the matter for further hearing on April 3.

The hearing in the Supreme Court during lawyer Prashant Bhushan's application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from adjudicating contempt plea filed against him by the Attorney General saw some heated arguments on Thursday.

The hearing in the Supreme Court during lawyer Prashant Bhushan's application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from adjudicating contempt plea filed against him by the Attorney General saw some heated arguments on Thursday. The case was being heard by a bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha. Senior lawyer Dushyant Dave, appearing for Prashant Bhushan, referred to some earlier orders passed by Justice Mishra, including the one in which the apex court had made observations about lawyers going to the media on sub-judice cases, and said this has given rise to an apprehension in Bhushan's mind. "Judges think independently. It is a matter of common knowledge that in some matters, some judges may have strict views while other judges will have different views. This is the beauty of this institution," Justice Sinha observed. Dave said apprehension has to be seen from the mind of litigants and not from the mind of judges. "Please hear our application (seeking recusal). There are reasons in it." To this, the bench told Dave, "Sorry, we are not with you. We should not express any opinion on this kind of application. If you want, we can pass reasoned order and then it will reflect many things. We are telling you." Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, which has also filed a separate contempt plea against Bhushan, referred to earlier orders passed by the apex court and said seeking recusal of judges has become a "pattern". He said earlier also attempts were made to have two out of three judges recuse from hearing the pleas seeking probe into the death of special CBI judge B H Loya, who was hearing the high-profile Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for some social activists who have sought to intervene in the case, said Mehta has no locus to argue in the matter as the Centre's contempt plea against Bhushan was not maintainable. "He (Mehta) appears in court, stands up and argues without being a party in the case," Dhavan said. "Mr Dhavan, please maintain cool," the bench said. To this, the senior lawyer replied, "I am cool, My Lord. My biggest advantage is, I don't have blood pressure." "Please check your blood pressure anyway", Justice Mishra commented. During the hearing, Bhushan admitted in the court that he had made a "genuine mistake" by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted in the apex court fabricated documents of the high-powered selection panel on appointment of interim CBI director. Advocate Dave expressed the inclination on behalf of his client to withdraw an application seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from hearing the contempt plea filed by Attorney General K K Venugopal against the activist lawyer. When the bench said the application be withdrawn with an unconditional apology, Dave said he will tender the same on behalf of Bhushan. However, when the bench sought Bhushan's own view, he said he was not inclined to tender an unconditional apology as the application filed by him was bona fide. Taking note of his statement, the bench said in its order, "We make it clear that there is no reason for recusal and we will deal with it." The bench has posted the matter for further hearing on April 3.

'I am cool', says lawyer in courtroom exchange during Prashant Bhushan case hearing

Lawyer-politician Prashant Bhushan Sunday stoked a controversy with certain remarks on Lord Krishna while criticising the &#39;anti-Romeo&#39; drive in Uttar Pradesh, following which he was booked for hurting religious feelings. 
 
&quot;Romeo loved just one lady, while Krishna was a legendary Eve teaser. Would (UP CM Yogi) Adityanath have the guts to call his vigilantes Anti-Krishna squads?&quot; Bhushan tweeted. 
 
As the controversy erupted, he tried to control damage by tweeting that his remarks had been distorted and he had no intention of hurting religious sentiments. 
 
&quot;My tweet on Romeo brigade being distorted. My position is: By the logic of Romeo Brigade, even Lord Krishna would look like eve teaser. 
 
&quot;We have grown up with legends of young Krishna teasing Gopis. The logic of Romeo squad would criminalise this. Didn&#39;t intend to hurt sentiments,&quot; he added in another tweet. 
 
However, by then separate police complaints had been filed against him by Delhi BJP spokesperson Tajinder Pal Bagga in the national capital and UP Congress spokesperson Zeeshan Haidar in Lucknow. 
 
Manzil Saini, Senior Superintendent of Police of Lucknow, said that they have registered an FIR against Bhushan under IPC sections related to hurting religious feelings and promoting enmity between different groups. 
 
&quot;The FIR has been registered against Prashant Bhushan under sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR has been lodged at Hazratganj Police Station,&quot; the SSP told PTI. 
 
Haider said he had lodged a police complaint against Bhushan for his indecent remarks on Lord Krishna, &quot;who is revered across the world. This is not a question of Hindu or Muslim. The tweets of Bhushan have hurt sentiments of crores of devotees.&quot; 
 
The Tilak Marg police in Delhi, where Bagga has lodged a complaint, is looking into the matter, a police official said, adding no FIR has been lodged yet. 
 
The special anti-Romeo squads of UP Police were formed to check eveteasing after the Yogi Aditynath government assumed office last month, fulfilling one of the poll promises of the BJP. Critics have alleged that it has led to incidents of harassment. 
 
Stressing that his government was firm on upholding the security and dignity of women, Chief Minister Adityanath had said the state-wide drive was launched to free public places of anti-social elements and check incidents of eve-teasing, indecent behaviour and passing of lewd comments at women and girls. 
 
Bhushan is a leader of Swaraj India party, which he along with his associate Yogendra Yadav floated in October last year after being expelled from AAP. 
 
Reacting to Bhushan&#39;s&nbsp;offensive&nbsp;tweet, UP BJP spokesperson Manish Shukla, said, &quot;It simply reflects his narrow mindset. The tweet has hurt the sentiments of billions of devotees of Lord Krishna not only in India, but across the world. 
 
&quot;He is the same Prashant Bhushan, who had once said that Kashmir is not a part of India. Hence, the need of the hour is to initiate stringent legal action against him.&quot; 
 
BJP&#39;s National General Secretary Bhupendra Yadav said Bhushan should study the Indian epics before commenting.

Clarifying Bhushan&#39;s statement, Swaraj Abhiyan&#39;s spokesperson Anupam said the lawyer&#39;s tweet was a satire by which he meant that the way the anti-romeo squads were working, they could raise question over every relationship between a man and woman and with their logic, they could even term Lord Krishna as an eve-teaser. 
 
Party member Yogendra Yadav said Bhushan meant to say that in the garb of controlling crime against women, it was wrong to term every relationship between a man and a woman as an offence. 
 
He also said no case was made out against Bhushan for allegedly insulting Lord Krishna with his indecent remarks.&nbsp;

(PTI)

 
&nbsp;

The BJP and the Congress have filed police complaints against the activist-lawyer

Lawyer-politician Prashant Bhushan Sunday stoked a controversy with certain remarks on Lord Krishna while criticising the 'anti-Romeo' drive in Uttar Pradesh, following which he was booked for hurting religious feelings. "Romeo loved just one lady, while Krishna was a legendary Eve teaser. Would (UP CM Yogi) Adityanath have the guts to call his vigilantes Anti-Krishna squads?" Bhushan tweeted. As the controversy erupted, he tried to control damage by tweeting that his remarks had been distorted and he had no intention of hurting religious sentiments. "My tweet on Romeo brigade being distorted. My position is: By the logic of Romeo Brigade, even Lord Krishna would look like eve teaser. "We have grown up with legends of young Krishna teasing Gopis. The logic of Romeo squad would criminalise this. Didn't intend to hurt sentiments," he added in another tweet. However, by then separate police complaints had been filed against him by Delhi BJP spokesperson Tajinder Pal Bagga in the national capital and UP Congress spokesperson Zeeshan Haidar in Lucknow. Manzil Saini, Senior Superintendent of Police of Lucknow, said that they have registered an FIR against Bhushan under IPC sections related to hurting religious feelings and promoting enmity between different groups. "The FIR has been registered against Prashant Bhushan under sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR has been lodged at Hazratganj Police Station," the SSP told PTI. Haider said he had lodged a police complaint against Bhushan for his indecent remarks on Lord Krishna, "who is revered across the world. This is not a question of Hindu or Muslim. The tweets of Bhushan have hurt sentiments of crores of devotees." The Tilak Marg police in Delhi, where Bagga has lodged a complaint, is looking into the matter, a police official said, adding no FIR has been lodged yet. The special anti-Romeo squads of UP Police were formed to check eveteasing after the Yogi Aditynath government assumed office last month, fulfilling one of the poll promises of the BJP. Critics have alleged that it has led to incidents of harassment. Stressing that his government was firm on upholding the security and dignity of women, Chief Minister Adityanath had said the state-wide drive was launched to free public places of anti-social elements and check incidents of eve-teasing, indecent behaviour and passing of lewd comments at women and girls. Bhushan is a leader of Swaraj India party, which he along with his associate Yogendra Yadav floated in October last year after being expelled from AAP. Reacting to Bhushan's offensive tweet, UP BJP spokesperson Manish Shukla, said, "It simply reflects his narrow mindset. The tweet has hurt the sentiments of billions of devotees of Lord Krishna not only in India, but across the world. "He is the same Prashant Bhushan, who had once said that Kashmir is not a part of India. Hence, the need of the hour is to initiate stringent legal action against him." BJP's National General Secretary Bhupendra Yadav said Bhushan should study the Indian epics before commenting. Clarifying Bhushan's statement, Swaraj Abhiyan's spokesperson Anupam said the lawyer's tweet was a satire by which he meant that the way the anti-romeo squads were working, they could raise question over every relationship between a man and woman and with their logic, they could even term Lord Krishna as an eve-teaser. Party member Yogendra Yadav said Bhushan meant to say that in the garb of controlling crime against women, it was wrong to term every relationship between a man and a woman as an offence. He also said no case was made out against Bhushan for allegedly insulting Lord Krishna with his indecent remarks. (PTI)

Prashant Bhushan in row for invoking Lord Krishna for Uttar Pradesh anti-Romeo squads