Justice, Speech and Selective Outrage: The Supreme Court's Contempt Dilemma
Menu
हिंदी తెలుగు اردو
Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion
Support independent journalism. Donate Now
Law
Justice, Speech and Selective Outrage: The Supreme Court's Contempt Dilemma
Rekha Sharma
4 minutes ago
The Supreme Court's swift move to initiate contempt proceedings against journalist Ajay Shukla for a critical YouTube video contrasts sharply with the way BJP MP Nishikant Dubey was handled.
Nishikant Dubey (left) and Ajay Shukla in the background. In the foreground is the Supreme Court.
Real journalism holds power accountable
Since 2015, The Wire has done just that.
But we can continue only with your support.
Contribute now
On May 30, a Supreme Court bench headed by the Chief Justice of India initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Ajay Shukla, a Chandigarh-based journalist, for posting a video on YouTube allegedly containing scathing and scandalous remarks against some senior judges of the Supreme Court.
The bench observed that though the Constitution guarantees to every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression, this is subject to reasonable restrictions and that such a right does not permit someone to defame a judge or bring into disrepute the institution of the judiciary. Having said so, the court directed that the offending video be taken down forthwith. It also asked the Attorney General and the Solicitor General to assist the court on the next date of hearing. Though the video is no longer available, it is widely believed that contain some allegedly objectionable remarks against Justice Surya Kant, who is next in line for the Chief Justiceship, and Justice Bela M. Trivedi, who retired mid-May.
It may be stated, at the very outset, that the dignity, majesty and honour of the Supreme Court, or for that matter any court of justice must be protected at all cost by every person including by the Supreme Court itself. That said, fair criticism of a judicial decision and the conduct of a judge – provided it is done in good faith and on accurate facts – also needs to be equally protected. In this background, while no one can question the right and the prerogative of the Supreme Court to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Shukla, the action taken has given rise to certain questions.
Not very long ago, highly objectionable and vicious remarks were made by Nishikant Dubey, a Lok Sabha member of the ruling party, against the then CJI, Justice Sanjiv Khanna. Dubey held him singularly responsible for all the alleged 'civil wars' in the country. He also alleged that the Supreme Court was taking the country towards anarchy. These remarks were not only highly toxic and outrageous, they had the potential to rock the very foundation of our judicial system and erode the people's faith in the judiciary and almost bordered on 'blasphemy'.
And yet, even though the fountain head of the judiciary was personally targeted, it neither caused any stir nor a ripple. There was a sphinx like silence. No judge deemed it fit to issue any suo motu criminal contempt notice against the errant MP. It was the Supreme Court Bar Association which raised its voice, and urged the Attorney General to grant consent for initiating contempt proceedings against Dubey. The AG neither on his own nor on the request of the Bar Association has till date given or declined to give his consent. This, despite the fact that he as the first law officer of the country, has a duty to uphold the dignity and majesty of the court of which he is an integral part.
It ultimately fell on the lot of Justice Khanna himself to give a befitting response to the likes of Dubey. Though the bench headed by him dismissed a petition which sought contempt action against the MP, he gave a very measured and dignified response to him. Holding that the comments were highly irresponsible and reflected a penchant to attract attention by casting aspersions on the Supreme Court and its judges, he wrote that the courts are not so fragile as flowers to wither and wilt under such ludicrous statements. He further observed, 'We do not believe that the confidence and the credibility of the courts in the eyes of the public can be shaken by such statements'. Kudos to Justice Sanjiv Khanna for such a befitting response.
Going by media reports, Justice Bela Trivedi has not been given a farewell by the Supreme Court Bar Association. The CJI is reported to have expressed his disapproval over the decision of the Bar Association, and so has Justice A.G. Masih, who said that tradition must be followed. It is for the first time in the history of the Supreme Court that such a tradition has been broken. The bar, it is said, is the judge of the judges. It is not for nothing that Justice Bela Trivedi has been denied the honour of a farewell by the bar. The question is why did things come to such a pass? It should set both bench and bar thinking. Undoubtedly, a long standing tradition has been broken but, then, judgeship is not a blank cheque. It comes with responsibility. The bar not only helps judges make the justice delivery system work, it also acts as a watchdog. The bar has, by its action, sent a loud and clear message.
It is time for judges to remember that they too are under watch. They may, in a given case, fail to grasp some suspected hidden meaning of a column written in English by an Oxford educated professor and leave the job of deciphering it to some police officer, and that too not from a particular state. But if they fail to take action against a minister who made a highly objectionable statement in simple and understandable Hindi, it does raise eyebrows. It is in such matters that the bar has to play its role. And, if it does play its role, there should be no protest.
Rekha Sharma is a former judge of the Delhi high court.
This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Make a contribution to Independent Journalism
Related News
Central Hall | Governors Increasingly Acting like Political Agents as Constitutional Morality Erodes
'Same Sex Marriage Not Legalised But Couples Can Very Well Form A Family': Madras HC
Indian Astronaut Shubhanshu Shukla-led Mission to International Space Station Pushed to June 10
'Highly Irresponsible': BJP MP Nishikant Dubey Faces Supreme Court Wrath
Why the Process of 44 MLAs 'Forming the Government' in Manipur Is Not Straightforward
US Supreme Court Rules $1.29 Bn Lawsuit Against ISRO-Owned Antrix to Proceed
Modi-Shah Face Dilemma As Their Stormtroopers Cross All Limits of Propriety
The Arrest and Trial of Professor Azaan M
Free Speech on Eggshells: What the Ali Khan Mahmudabad Case Signals for All of Us
About Us
Contact Us
Support Us
© Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
CM: businesses will no longer need police licence to run operations
Hotels, swimming pools, guest houses, video game parlours, auditoriums, and amusement parks in Delhi will no longer require licences from the police to be operational, said Chief Minister Rekha Gupta on Sunday. However, municipal corporations and the departments concerned should now grant permission for their functioning. On June 19, Lieutenant-Governor V.K. Saxena had approved an order withdrawing the requirement of the Delhi police to issue licences for seven business sectors under the Delhi Police Act, 1978. Businesses will now be exempted from having to obtain a no-objection certificate from the police. The exemption encompasses entities such as hotels, motels, guest houses, restaurants (eating houses), swimming pools, auditoriums, video game parlours, discotheques, and amusement parks. The licensing power will now be transferred to local bodies such as the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, New Delhi Municipal Council, or Delhi Cantonment Board. The move comes after hotel and guest house operators sought the repealing of licences during a meeting with Chairman of the Chamber of Trade and Industry Brijesh Goyal and Industries Minister Manjinder Sirsa. Ms. Gupta said the reform is a direct reflection of the government's 'visionary approach' and in line with the BJP-led Centre's 'minimum government, maximum governance' and Ease of Doing Business policies. 'This decision is not only a big step towards administrative reform but also the result of the policy and thinking of the Central government,' said the CM. 'The Centre is adopting ease of doing business for the benefit of the country, which is being implemented in Delhi,' she added. Ms. Gupta said Union Home Minister Amit Shah has categorically said the police force should be relieved from non-core duties so that their energy and resources can be focused on law and order, security, and crime control. The subject of policing in the national capital lies under the Home Ministry. 'We want to make Delhi not only the political capital of India but also a model of good governance. That is the mission of our double-engine government,' the CM said.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
BJP MLA slams Cong for ‘pro-terror' stand
Lucknow: BJP MLA from Sarojininagar, Rajeshwar Singh, on Saturday launched a scathing attack on the , accusing it of adopting a "pro-terrorism" stance by siding with Iran and vilifying Israel. Singh condemned Congress for what he termed a "shocking and shameful" defence of Iran, a country he described as a known sponsor of and a rogue nuclear aspirant. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "While the global community — from the United States to Europe and Israel — is uniting against Iran-backed terror networks, Congress has chosen to defend Tehran and criticise Israel, the only democracy in the region," Singh said. Taking strong exception to Congress referring to Iran as a "long-standing friend," Singh reminded the public that Iran had repeatedly insulted India over Kashmir, interfered in domestic matters like the CAA protests and Delhi riots, and echoed Pakistan-like narratives on Muslim persecution. "A nuclear Iran is not Israel's crisis alone — it's a global nightmare," Singh warned. Calling for national unity, he urged all political parties and citizens to reject Congress's alleged soft stance on terror regimes.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Akhilesh: Storing poll data must, will oppose EC move
Lucknow: Stressing that it is important to store election data, Samajwadi Party national president Akhilesh Yadav on Sunday said that the decision of the Election Commission to destroy the video footage of the election process after 45 days could have been taken "under pressure from the BJP". "We will oppose the EC's decision. If the question is where to store the data, there are CCTV cameras installed in most houses and shops in the country. Data is stored even in homes and shops," Akhilesh said. "This govt claims that the biggest data centres in the country are being built in Uttar Pradesh . The state govt is announcing special packages for data centre owners. When such big data centres are being built, how can there be no space to store election data," he asked. "It is important that the election data is stored and remains safe. It appears that the Election Commission is taking such a decision under pressure from the BJP," Yadav said. In an apparent reference to Kundarki bypolls, he said that the CCTV footage showed policemen in civic dress coming out after voting. "They say privacy is being violated. This is not about privacy. This is a mafia act by the police to loot votes. It should be exposed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like ¡Este verano disfruta de 50GB gratis! Simyo Haz clic aquí Undo We will tell the Election Commission that our privacy will not be violated by this. If they want affidavits from voters, we will request voters to submit them. Whatever is captured in CCTV cameras of Kundarki should be telecast on the TV channels to show who have cast the vote," he said, adding that even powerful countries like America were conducting election through ballots. On Indians stranded abroad, the SP chief said, "Some people from Uttar Pradesh have gone on a tour. I spoke to them. They said 2,500-3,000 people are stranded, and India is not helping. Flights are returning empty, but there is no one to bring them back. Since June 19, none from this group could return. They demand that the govt and the opposition should look into their issue." "I appeal to the govt to arrange special flights and resort to special diplomatic methods to bring back Indian nationals stranded in other countries," Yadav said.
