Attorney General declines nod for contempt action against Rajdeep Sardesai

The contempt plea was over the journalist’s tweets on SC verdict in Prashant Bhushan case

Senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai. File

Attorney General K.K. Venugopal on Thursday declined to grant permission to initiate contempt action against senior journalist Rajdeep Sardesai for his tweets.

In a one-page letter addressed to complainant, advocate Omprakash Parihar, Mr. Venugopal reasoned that “trifling remarks and mere passing criticism, though perhaps distasteful, are unlikely to tarnish the image of the institution.”

The contempt plea was over Mr. Sardesai’s tweets in connection with the Supreme Court verdict in a suo motu contempt case against civil rights lawyer Prashant Bhushan, punishing the latter with a ₹1 fine for “scandalising the court” with his tweets.

“I have given careful consideration to the tweets. I find the statements made by Mr. Sardesai are not of so serious nature as to undermine the majesty of the Supreme Court or lower its stature in the minds of the public ... The reputation of the Supreme Court as one of the great pillars of our democracy has been built assiduously over the last 70 years,” Mr. Venugopal wrote.

The Attorney General has to give permission to initiate contempt of court action.

Swara Bhasker issue

In August, Mr. Venugopal had similarly declined permission to a complainant who wanted to initiate contempt proceedings against actor Swara Bhasker for “scandalising” the Supreme Court with her tweets on the court’s verdict in the Ramjanmabhoomi title dispute case.

The Attorney General had found no substance in that plea against Ms. Bhasker, saying her comments regarding the Ramjanmabhoomi verdict “appears to be a factual one” and contained her “perception” of the judgment.

In his complaint, Mr. Parihar had claimed that the statement made by Mr. Sardesai was a deliberate attempt to erode public faith and confidence in the judiciary.

“That the contemnor tweet is of serious nature putting a big question on sovereign function of the Supreme Court and their abiding nature to the Constitution,” the plea had said.

It had accused Mr. Sardesai of having “wilfully disobeyed” the court. It had pleaded that a serious view of his conduct was required to be taken for ensuring proper administration of justice.