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
Hindustan Times
44 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
2 injured as Delhi govt's new DEVI bus rams bicycle in Loni
Two people got injured on Friday morning after a Delhi government bus rammed their bicycle in Loni area, police said, adding that it was the government's recently launched Devi (Delhi Electric Vehicle Interconnector) bus. 'The electric bus involved in the accident was speeding and driven rashly. It later hit two people travelling on a bicycle. One of the injured, Kailash Singh, 52, lost a leg while Ghanshyam did not sustain serious injuries. They both were rushed to a hospital in Delhi, and are under treatment,' Ajay Kumar Singh, ACP of Ankur Vihar Circle, said. 'Once the families file a complaint, we will register an FIR. The electric bus from Delhi was seized soon after the incident,' the ACP added. Harendra Malik, SHO of Loni Border police station said the driver has been identified. They will detain him once a complaint is filed. The incident triggered a political spat between the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) with the former blaming the BJP government for the incident, claiming the buses are being handed over to the drivers without any training. 'A tragic accident happened at Loni border – who is responsible? Delhi government's Devi electric bus crushed several people. This accident is not just an accident, it is the result of the gross negligence of the BJP government running in Delhi. The bus is handed over to the driver without training. Drivers are being recruited through private companies with no standards of experience and safety. Why is an important public service like DTC being given on contract? Why are drivers not being properly trained? Why is every week some innocent person losing his life on the road? This is not just an accident, this is a picture of the failure of Rekha Gupta's government,' AAP MLA Sanjeev Jha said in a post on X. Delhi BJP spokesperson Praveen Shankar Kapoor hit out at the AAP, saying that the 'so-called untrained drivers have been working since the time of the AAP government.' When asked about the incident, a transport department official said necessary actions will be taken as per relevant laws after a complaint is filed.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
BJP team to visit Dakshina Kannada to assess recent communal incidents
Mangaluru: A BJP delegation will visit Dakshina Kannada on Monday to gather information on murders of Suhas Shetty, Abdul Rahiman, and a series of killings reported in the past. The aim is to understand the backgrounds and find reasons for these incidents. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now As a responsible party, the BJP team, led by BJP state president BY Vijayendra, opposition leader R Ashoka, and others, is visiting the district to find solutions and restore peace in the region, said BJP MLC CT Ravi. He said on Saturday that govt should find the roots of all clashes. "There is a need for peace in the district, and Congress leaders have put forth the same demand. Meanwhile, police is also taking measures in this direction. As far as I know, illegal cow transportation, cow slaughter, love jihad, and religious conversion are the reasons for all communal hatred. Hence, govt should put an end to all these illegal activities to preserve harmony in the district," said Ravi. Individuals involved in cow slaughter violate constitutional principles, yet authorities maintain equal treatment towards both perpetrators and those who stand against such acts. Ravi urged the police and govt to destroy the organised ecosystem that promotes love jihad, due to which several families have suffered. While PM Narendra Modi has a vision to make India a developed nation by 2047, there are some organisations like SIMI, PFI, and Indian Mujahideen working with the agenda for Islamisation of the nation. The major sources of funding for all illegal activities are ganja, drugs, betting, illegal mining, and sand trade, Ravi said. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Ravi advocated for prohibiting religious texts that promote jihad and destruction of 'kafirs'. He emphasised that implementing restrictions on such religious literature would foster harmony. He also criticised the Congress for not visiting the house of Suhas Shetty. "The Congress govt is trying to frame Hindutva leaders in the Abdul Rahiman murder case," he alleged. On allegations that CM Siddaramaiah chose to dine at a hotel even after being informed of multiple deaths due to the stampede, Ravi said if it was true, even God will not forgive our CM. "If it is true, he has no right to continue as the chief minister," he added.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Who's really over-represented? Busting delimitation myths
The announcement of Census 2027 has sparked off a fresh debate on delimitation. The argument that it will penalise states that have controlled their population better is based on popularly held myths. Research this writer undertook on Census data since 1872 shows that all regions of India grew briskly in terms of population at different points of time, with the South growing faster till 1951, and North India picking up pace after that. Kerala was the first state to double its population between 1881 and 1931, and Tamil Nadu was the next. Kerala doubled its population yet again between 1931 and 1971, and then began to stabilise its population. While this may sound surprising to many, it's true, and follows the pattern demographic transition has taken the world over. Out of the four regions of India, the North grew at the lowest rate between 1881 and 1951. Its demographic take-off decade was the 1950s, precisely the period when 'population explosion' emerged as a serious global policy concern. The later demographic growth phase of the North was thus mistakenly seen as caused by social and cultural backwardness, and failure of family planning, without considering longer-term empirical evidence. In 1976, delimitation was frozen for 25 years on the basis of the 1971 Census, and the same was done in 2001 for another 25 years. So, the constitutional principle of 'one person, one vote, one value' no longer holds, and the value of a vote in Bihar is much lower than the value of a vote in Tamil Nadu and Kerala. Policymakers will have to figure out how to reconcile the constitutional promise with this skew which will have only increased since 2001. Importantly, while the right to equality is one of the bedrocks of the Constitution, formal equality is abandoned by it only for the benefit of the more deprived and backward — subsidies to the poor and reservation for backward classes being an example — and never for the well-off. One argument that the debate on delimitation will thus have to confront is whether formal equality can be abandoned in favour of better-off groups, socially or geographically, and what it will mean for the Constitution. While this is for political players to decide, it is important that the debate takes place on an empirically sound basis. The North, meaning the Hindi belt, has not grown at a disproportionate rate vis-a-vis other regions of India, and its national population share has gone down from about 50% in 2001 to 46% in 2011. South India has grown rapidly for 100 of those 150 years, increasing its share from about 22% in 1881 to about 26% in 1951, maintaining it at around 25% in 1971, before going down in the last few decades. Over 1881-1971, the North had the lowest cumulative growth of about 115%, as compared to the South at 193%, West 168% and East 213%. Over 1881-2011, the North at 427% was again at the bottom, with the South at 445%, West at 500%, and East at 535%. The prevalent distorted perception arises from taking only the post-1971 period into account — when population growth in the South started slowing down with better social and economic indicators, even as growth in the less developed North and better-off states of the West picked up. Without considering principles of demographic transition that operate in most societies over the long term, a proper perspective on why populations of different regions of India — or, of the world for that matter — grow at differential paces during any given period won't develop. Culture may at best be a marginal influence on population growth patterns, which social and economic factors adequately explain. Any causal connection between family planning and population control in India is at best tenuous, mainly because when family planning assumed importance in the 1960s, some southern states had already grown at a rapid pace and were at or near their peak population growth rates. Therefore, they witnessed stabilisation from the 1970s and 1980s. Family planning was at best an associate factor. Moreover, relatively developed western India has shown good demographic growth over the last 150 years, increasing its population share and potential parliamentary representation. Today, North and West India are grossly under-represented, the East is almost even, while the South is heavily over-represented. While the average Lok Sabha constituency in the South has just about 21 lakh people, in the North it has around 31 lakh, and in the West 28 lakh. The real divide in representation isn't North vs South; it's more like the South versus the rest. Mishra, a historian, is the author of 'Demography, Representation, Delimitation: The North-South Divide in India' and joint director, Prime Ministers Museum and Library
