The Advocate Prashant Bhushan has been fine 1 rupees by Indian Supreme Court within Sept. 15 for guilty of criminal contempt on his Twitter account.
The bench of advocates Arun Mishra, Justice BR Gavai and Justice Krishna Murari order this judgment today. And if Prashant Bhushan failed to pay one rupees then he will suffer up to three months imprisonment and temporary debarment from practice from Supreme Court.
“My lawyer & senior colleague Rajiv Dhavan contributed 1 Re immediately after the contempt judgement today which I gratefully accepted (sic),” Advocate Prashant Bhushan twitted today.
Back to back two twitte make this controversy. In his first twitte he allegation to the functioning of Supreme court from past six years and in the second twitted he mocked the chief justice of Supreme court, “The CJI rides a Rs 50-lakh motorcycle belonging to a BJP leader at Raj Bhavan, Nagpur, without wearing a mask or helmet, at a time when he keeps the SC on lockdown mode denying citizens their fundamental right to access justice!”.
Prashant Bhushan is not guilty for his controversial twitte. He think that if he apologized then it will violate his “contempt of his conscience” and discharge of his “highest duty”.
Final after complete judgment Prashant Bhushan give 1 Rs immediately and he twitted “My lawyer & senior colleague Rajiv Dhavan contributed 1 Re immediately after the contempt judgment today which I gratefully accepted”.
My lawyer & senior colleague Rajiv Dhavan contributed 1 Re immediately after the contempt judgement today which I gratefully accepted pic.twitter.com/vVXmzPe4ss
— Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) August 31, 2020
Supreme Court justice Arun Mishra said “If you are hurting someone, then what is wrong in apologizing,” “For how long the system will suffer all this? I am retiring in a few days. Will it be okay if you or others start attacking me? You should apply balm if you have caused hurt.
“We gave several opportunities and encouragement to advocate Prashant Bhushan to express regret. He not only gave wide publicity to the second statement but also gave various interviews to press,” the Supreme said on his judgment about this matter.
