The Supreme Court Thursday dismissed a petition as withdrawn filed by Senior journalist N. Ram, former Union minister Arun Shourie and noted advocate Prashant Bhushan challenging the constitutional validity of the sub-section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 which deals with the offence of criminal contempt on the ground of “scandalizing the court or lowering the dignity of the court”.
Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, for the petitioners, submitted that though the issue was important, they would not like to raise it at this stage. Dhavan, thus, sought liberty to raise the issue again at a later stage, “maybe after two months or so”.
A three-judge bench led by Justice Arun Mishra while giving permission to withdraw the plea, said the petitioners should not raise the issue again before the Supreme Court. They could, however, move the High Court later, the bench said.
Also Read: Bonafide critique of CJI’s actions not scandalous of the SC, says Prashant Bhushan
The said petition had been filed after the Supreme Court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against advocate Prashant Bhushan for two tweets regarding the institution of the Supreme Court and the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI). It also took up for hearing an 11-year-old contempt case against Bhushan.
Initially, the plea challenging sub-section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was listed before a bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and K M Joseph on August 10. This led to an explanation being sought from the officials of the court’s registry for ‘incorrect listing of the case’.
Subsequently, the matter was deleted from the bench of Justices Chandrachud and Joseph and listed before a three-judge bench of Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Krishna Murari. This, as per reports, was on account of an application filed along with the petition seeking a stay on the ongoing proceedings against Bhushan, which was being heard by a Bench led by Justice Mishra.
In their plea, N Ram, Shourie, and Bhushan had contended that “the offence of “scandalizing the court” is rooted in colonial assumptions and objects, which have no place in legal orders committed to democratic constitutionalism and the maintenance of an open robust public sphere”.
It was also contended by the petitioners that the said sub-section is violative of the right to free speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.
