[ad_1]
New Delhi:
In a 2009 case involving feedback by lawyer Prashant Bhushan on judges, the Supreme Court at this time requested Chief Justice SA Bobde to put it earlier than an “appropriate bench”.
The courtroom listed the case in opposition to Prashant Bhushan earlier than one other bench on September 10.
“I am short of time. I am demitting office. This requires detailed hearing of four to five hours,” Justice Arun Mishra noticed.
The courtroom stated “It’s not a question of punishment, it’s a question of faith in the institution. When people come to the court for relief when that faith is shaken that’s a problem.”
Prashant Bhushan’s lawyer Rajeev Dhawan had argued that any query in reference to corruption by judges – whether or not it quantities to contempt or not – needs to be examined by a structure bench.
The Supreme Court had stated within the final listening to that it’s going to study bigger questions together with beneath what circumstances allegations of judicial corruption may be made. It additionally talked about analyzing what process should be adopted in contempt instances if allegations of corruption are raised in opposition to sitting and retired judges.
The contempt case includes statements that Prashant Bhushan made throughout an interview to Tehelka journal in 2009, wherein he stated half the 16 Chief Justices of India had been corrupt.
Justice Arun Mishra stated: “We wanted to finish this. We wanted to end the case, but the basic question is – 1) if you want to speak to the media; 2) in case you have any grievance against any judge, what should be the process; 3) In what circumstances can such allegations be made is also a question.”
Rajeev Dhavan had argued that the usage of the phrase corruption doesn’t quantity to contempt of courtroom.
[ad_2]
Source hyperlink