NewsClick

NewsClick
  • हिन्दी
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Covid-19
  • Science
  • Culture
  • India
  • International
  • Sports
  • Articles
  • Videos
search
menu

INTERACTIVE ELECTION MAPS

image/svg+xml
  • All Articles
  • Newsclick Articles
  • All Videos
  • Newsclick Videos
  • हिन्दी
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Science
  • Culture
  • India
  • Sports
  • International
  • Africa
  • Latin America
  • Palestine
  • Nepal
  • Pakistan
  • Sri Lanka
  • US
  • West Asia
About us
Subscribe
Follow us Facebook - Newsclick Twitter - Newsclick RSS - Newsclick
close menu
×
For latest updates on nCOVID-19 around the world visit our INTERACTIVE COVID MAP
Law
Politics
India

Delhi Bar Council Issues Notice to Prashant Bhushan Asking why Disciplinary Proceedings Against him should not be Initiated Following SC Contempt Verdict

The SC on August 14 held advocate Bhushan guilty of contempt of court for his two tweets regarding the institution of the Supreme Court and the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI).
The Leaflet
23 Sep 2020
Prashant Bhushan

Prashant Bhushan

The Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) on whose rolls advocate Prashant Bhushan is enrolled, has issued notice to him asking him show-cause why disciplinary proceedings under the Advocates Act, 1961 should not be initiated against him for having been found guilty of contempt of court by the apex court.

BCD, in this context, has also asked Bhushan to appear before it on October 23 either in person or through his authorized representative.

This has come after the Bar Council of India (BCI) directed the BCD on September 4 to examine whether Bhushan’s conviction for contempt of court invited disciplinary proceedings against him under the Advocates Act, 1961.

The BCI had said that it was the view that the tweets and statements made by Prashant Bhushan and the judgment of the Supreme Court need a thorough examination by the Bar Council in light of the statutory duties, power and functions conferred on it under the Advocates’ Act 1961 and the rules framed thereunder, particularly Section 24A and Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961 and Chapter-II, Part VI of the Bar Council of Rules.

Section 24A of the Advocates Act provides for disqualification from enrolment inter-alia on the ground that the person is convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude.

Section 36 deals with the disciplinary powers of the Bar Council of India over the misconduct of advocates.

The SC on August 14 held advocate Bhushan guilty of contempt of court for his two tweets regarding the institution of the Supreme Court and the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

In his first tweet on June 27, Bhushan had said, “When historians in future look back at the last six years to see how democracy has been destroyed in India even without a formal Emergency, they will particularly mark the role of the Supreme Court in this destruction, & more particularly the role of the last 4 CJIs.”

Likewise, the second tweet dated June 29 commented on a viral picture that showed CJI Bobde on a Harley Davidson bike. The tweet in question read: “CJI rides a 50 lakh motorcycle belonging to a BJP leader at Raj Bhavan, Nagpur, without a mask or helmet, at a time when he keeps the SC in Lockdown mode denying citizens their fundamental right to access Justice!”

A three-judge bench led by Justice Mishra held that the tweets were an attempt to shake the very foundation of constitutional democracy and hence must be dealt with an ‘iron hand’.

The bench added that if the attack is not dealt with, with a requisite degree of firmness, then it may affect India’s national honour and it’s prestige in the comity of nations.

The Court on August 31 handed down the punishment to Bhushan by imposing a fine Rs. 1, failing which he would be sentenced to 3 months in jail and be debarred from practicing in the apex court for 3 years.

Bhushan recently filed a review petition against the judgment holding him guilty of contempt. The same is pending consideration of the Court. He deposited Rs.1/- as fine in compliance with the Court order earlier this month.

The article was originally published in The Leaflet.

Get the latest reports & analysis with people's perspective on Protests, movements & deep analytical videos, discussions of the current affairs in your Telegram app. Subscribe to NewsClick's Telegram channel & get Real-Time updates on stories, as they get published on our website.
Delhi Bar Council
Prashant Bhushan
Prashant Bhushan Contempt case
CJI
SC
Law
Indian Judiciary
Related Stories
abortion.

A Progressive Ruling on Right to Abort, Yet Fear of Stigma Lurks

donald Trump

Dear Republicans, Was Your Deal With Trump Worth It?

law

Whether Judiciary Delivers or not Depends on who is Appointed as Judge: Indira Jaising

GAming.

Andhra’s Gaming Law: A Setback to Liberty and Human Agency?

Killing the Messenger Who Made the Caricature

Killing the Messenger Who Made the Caricature

RTI.

Will the Right to Information Act Become the Right to Denial of Information Act?

AG

Explainer: Attorney General’s Consent for Criminal Contempt of Court Proceedings

Centra Vista.

SC Allows Centre to Lay Foundation Stone for Controversial Central Vista Project

Supreme court.

Does the Collegium System Ensure Independence of Indian Judiciary?

Siddique.

SC Adjourns Matter Seeking Siddique Kappan’s Release; UP Govt Claims it has had no Objection to Kerala Journalist Meeting his Lawyer

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on WhatsAppShare via EmailShare on RedditShare on KindlePrint
Share
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on WhatsAppShare via EmailShare on RedditShare on KindlePrint
Share

Related Stories

Ayaskant Das

NITI Aayog Studying How Judges Can Help Economics Beat Environmental Concerns

13 February 2021
New Delhi: Whose interests is the Narendra Modi government trying to protect in its attempt to rein in the judiciary from issuing
Sumedha Pal

Budget 2021: Dalit and Adivasi Groups Slam Allocations, Call it Lack Luster

03 February 2021
Even as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government boasted about the ‘AtmaNirbhar’ budget this year, Dalit and Adivasi groups have slammed their a
P. Puneeth

Supreme Court Strikes Down Policy of Excluding the Reserved Community From Competing for General and Open Category

25 January 2021
The Supreme Court has rejected a policy of UP regarding reservation and said that selection of candidates with less merit than other candidates

Pagination

  • Next page ››

More

  • Lingaram Uikey (back row centre) who claims to be a police informer was made to surrender under the Lon Varratu scheme along with five others on February 19 this year. The five others included Pandey Kawasi ( on the right of Lingaram) who allegedly died by suicide in police custody four days after the surrender.

    Surrender of Alleged Informers, Villagers as Maoists Raise Suspicions on Chhattisgarh Govt’s Lon Varratu Scheme

  • Farmers Block KMP Highway as Warning to Intensify Struggle

    Farm Laws: Farmers Block KMP Highway as Warning to Intensify Struggle in Coming Days

  • COVID-19 Spreading In Telugu States at Alarming Rate

    COVID-19 Spreading In Telugu States at Alarming Rate

  • Tamil Nadu: Increasing COVID-19 Cases, Govt Struggling on Education Front

    Tamil Nadu: Increasing COVID-19 Cases, Govt Struggling on Education Front

  • Load More
Subscribe
connect with
about