Prashant Bhushan contests SC contempt notice, terms tweets as bona fide criticism of CJIs

Activist-advocate Prashant Bhushan has contested strongly before the Supreme Court the contempt notice issued to him for two of his tweets, saying those were his "bona fide critique of a CJI and succession of CJIs which does not scandalise the court or lower its authority".

He maintained, "to assume and suggest that the 'CJI is the SC and the SC is the CJI' is to undermine the institution of the Supreme Court of India".

In his 142-page response to the Supreme Court's notice of July 22, he said the tweet regarding the CJI riding a motorcycle on June 29 was made "primarily to underline my anguish at the non-physical functioning of the Supreme Court for last more than three months (during Covid-19 pandemic), as a result of which fundamental rights of citizens, such as those in detention, those destitute and poor and others facing serious and urgent grievances were not being addressed".

However, he admitted that he did not notice that the bike was on a stand and therefore wearing helmet was not required.

The top court's bench led by Justice Arun Mishra is scheduled to consider the matter on August 5.

With regard to his tweet of June 27 alleging role of past four CJIs in "destruction of democracy", he said his criticism has been "outspoken yet it has been carefully weighed and made with the highest sense of responsibility".

He cited an instance of four senior-most judges press conference of January 12, 2018, erosion on rights like freedom of speech and dissent, assault on Institutions. Bhushan highlighted the instance of "omission and commission of the Supreme Court during the tenure of last four CJIs".

He gave instances of Sahara Birla diary case, Kalikho Pul suicide note, medical college bribery case, denial to the CBI to register FIR against an Allahabad High Court judge, judicial judgements, debatable judgements in Judge Loya case, Bhima Koregaon case, Assam NRC case, electoral bonds matter, sexual harassment case, Article 370 case, habeas corpus cases, CBI director's tenure and Ayodhya case verdict, Citizenship Amendment Act, Delhi riots and among others.

"The decisions and inaction of the courts in dealing with these criticism cases are enough to form an opinion about the role-playing by the Supreme Court in last six years in undermining democracy, which bona fide opinion, I am entitled to form, hold and express under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution," he asserted.