Advocate Prashant Bhushan on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to defer the sentence hearing in a suo motu criminal contempt case in which he was convicted on August 14 .
Also read: Legal and civil society luminaries issue statement on judgment against Prashant Bhushan
The sentence hearing is scheduled before a three-judge Bench led by Justice Arun Mishra on August 20.
Mr. Bhushan, represented by advocate Kamini Jaiswal, said he intended to file a review petition against the August 14 judgment within the stipulated 30 days time as provided under Order 47 of the Supreme Court Rules of 2013.
First appeal
He said his review petition, when filed, should be treated like a first appeal against conviction. He argued that a conviction by the Supreme Court in suo motu contempt proceedings had no avenue for appeal. Thus, a review filed against the conviction should be considered as the first appeal and heard accordingly. Otherwise, it would be gross injustice to not provide an occasion to examine the correctness of the findings in the August 14 judgment.
“In criminal contempt proceedings, the Supreme Court functions like a trial court. It is also the last court. Section 19(1) (of the Contempt of Courts Act) gives a statutory right of appeal to a person found guilty of contempt by the High Court. The fact that there is no appeal against an order of the Supreme Court makes it doubly necessary that it takes the utmost precaution to ensure that justice is not only done but seen to be done”, he argued.
Postponing the sentence hearing till a decision was taken on the proposed review petition would serve justice. A deferment would be in line with the underlying public policy to safeguard personal liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution, he said.
Mr. Bhushan highlighted need to appeal the conviction as “human judgment is not infallible”.
“Despite all the provisions ensuring a fair trial and a just decision, mistakes are possible and errors cannot be ruled out”, he submitted.
In the alternative, the sentence should be stayed till the review is decided. “Alternatively, if this court proceeds with the hearing on sentence and imposes any sentence, the same may be directed to be stayed till the remedy of review is exhausted by the applicant”, he said.
Two tweets
A virtual court Bench led by Justice Mishra had convicted the civil rights lawyer in suo motu contempt proceedings for his tweet of a photograph of Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde astride a bike and another about the Court’s functioning in te past six years.
The court, while initiating contempt against the lawyer, said the tweets had undermined the authority of the court and dignity of the CJI's office.
The judgment said “malicious attacks” on the court should be dealt firmly with an “iron hand”.
The conviction created a public furore. Many prominent personalities, from former apex court judges to senior lawyers, veteran journalists, authors, former bureaucrats and others, have expressed their solidarity with Mr. Bhushan.
