PPT on professional ethics, Slides of Ethics

Download PPT on professional ethics and more Slides Ethics in PDF only on Docsity!

ASSIGNMENT II - PPT ON LANDMARK

JUDGEMENT

SUBMITTED BY- NEHA,KHUSHI,TISHA,GURPREET, PRACHI,SUGANDHNI SUBMITTED TO- MS. ANKITA MAM

CASE TITLE: IN RE: PRASHANT BHUSHAN & ANR.

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Date of Judgment: August 14, 2020 (Guilt) and August 31, 2020 (Sentencing)
• Bench: Justices Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai , and Krishna Murari
• Citation: (2021)3 SCC 160
• Overview: The Supreme Court initiated suo moto criminal contempt proceedings against Advocate Prashant Bhushan for two tweets that allegedly undermined the dignity and authority of the judiciary.

• Under section 12 , the punishment for this is simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with a fine which may extend to two thousand rupees or with both. But the accused may be discharged or the remittance of punishment may be done if the accused seeks an apology from the court.

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

• Article 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and High Court respectively to punish people for their respective contempt.
• Article 142 of the Indian Constitution also empowers the court to punish for its contempt. This article empower the court to make any order necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.However what is contempt of court per se has not been defined by the Indian Constitution.
• Statutory Provisions: The Contempt of Court Act, 1971 elaborately deals with the concept of contempt of court.
• Section 10 of The Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 defines the power of the High Court to punish contempts of its subordinate courts.

• Mahek Maheswari represented by Advocate Anuj Saxena filed a petition against Prashant Bhushan and Twitter India on July 2. She requested the court to initiate contempt of court proceedings against Bhushan for his tweets, alleging that it 'inspired a feeling of no- confidence' in the independence of the judiciary and also amounted to 'scandalizing the court!'
• The Supreme Court took suo moto cognizance and initiated contempt proceedings.

ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT

• The main issue was whether Prashant Bhushan's tweets on 27 and 29 June 2020 amounted to criminal contempt of court or not?

JUDGEMENT

• On July 22, the Supreme Court noted that the contempt proceedings were based on Prashant Bhushan’s tweets from June 27 and 29, which it felt undermined judicial authority.
• After finding him guilty of criminal contempt, the Court asked Bhushan to apologize unconditionally by August 24.
• Instead, he filed a supplementary statement on that date, standing by his views. On August 31, 2020, the Supreme Court fined Prashant Bhushan for Rs 1 which he was required to pay before september15,2020. On failure to do so, Bhushan would be punished for the three months imprisonment and a three-year bar from practice if unpaid.

• The Court held that scandalizing the judiciary misuses free speech and emphasized that while fair criticism is allowed, it must respect limits under Article 19(2). The judgment reinforced that maintaining judicial independence takes precedence over unrestricted expression.

CONCLUSION

• The power of the Court for contempt is for the administration and effective functioning of the Court and not to protect an individual judge's self-esteem. After the judgment of the Court, Bhushan had a press conference wherein he mentioned that he would be filing review petitions against the judgments. It is concluded from the above situation that the judgments delivered were much faster as compared to others and the Court would dispose of cases at the same pace just like it did in the case of Prashant Bhushan.