Activist-advocate Prashant Bhushan on Tuesday refused to apologise before the Supreme Court for his 2009 interview with Tehelka magazine, wherein he accused eight out of 16 former Chief Justices of India of corruption. However, he expressed regret, if his statement caused hurt to judges or their family members and if it was misunderstood to lower the reputation of the judiciary.
A bench presided over by Justice Arun Mishra, which reserved its order, said that any statement of corruption in the judiciary per se would amount to contempt. The court said that there was a thin line between free speech and contempt. It told the counsel to save the system's grace and bring an end to the matter.
However, in its order released on evening, the bench, also comprising Justices B R Gavai and Krishna Murari, said, "Explanation or apology submitted by Bhushan and Tarun Tejpal (then-Tehelka editor) have not been received so far. In case we do not accept the explanation or apology, we will hear the matter. We reserve the order."
In his statement, Bhushan said he had used the word corruption in a wide sense meaning lack of propriety. "I did not mean only financial corruption or deriving any pecuniary advantage. If what I have said caused hurt to any of them or to their families in any way, I regret the same. I unreservedly state that I support the institution of the judiciary and especially the Supreme Court," he said.
The bench, preferred to speak to Rajeev Dhavan and Kapil Sibal, counsel for Bhushan and Tejpal respectively, over WhatsApp calls, after a brief hearing.
The bench asked the parties to issue statements tendering their apologies.
In the afternoon after the bench reassembled, Bhushan refused to apologise. Dhavan, for his part, told the court, if it wanted to render any finding on whether the interview amounted to contempt or not, it would have to hear the parties fully, on facts and law.
Meanwhile, a group of 16 prominent citizens, including Aruna Roy, T M Krishna, S R Hiremath, asked the court through an application to dismiss Suo Motu criminal contempt for tweets of Bhushan, saying it would have the effect of stifling legitimate criticism not just by him but by members of the general public, and has a “chilling effect” on the citizens’ right to free speech.