FEATUREDLatestNationalNewsTOP NEWS STORIESTOP STORIES

Prashant Bhushan’s Arguments Rejected By SC

Prashant Bhushan’s Arguments Rejected By SC, next hearing on 17 August on contempt of court. This case of Contempt of Court is related to an interview given by Bhushan to Tehelka, in which Prashant Bhushan (Prashant Bhushan) alleged that half of the 16 Chief Justices of India were corrupt.

A hearing was held in the Supreme Court in the Contempt of Court case against Prashant Bhushan, a well-known lawyer of the country. In this case of 11 years old, the court has refused to accept the cleanliness and regret of Prashant Bhushan.

This case is about an interview given to Tehelka by Bhushan, in which he alleged that half of the 16 Chief Justices of India were corrupt. The next hearing of the case will be held on August 17.

Prashant Bhushan has given his explanation in the court, while Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal has apologized. Earlier in the hearing, Bhushan regretted his statement in 2009, but he did not apologize unconditionally.

Supreme Court passes order and refuses to accept the expression of regret by lawyer Prashant Bhushan, in the 11-year old contempt of court case against him. SC noted that the case has to continue and needs to be heard by August 17.

Then Bhushan said that then I did not mean to say corruption, but it was a matter of not performing duty properly.

The Supreme Court said, “We need to check whether the statement regarding corruption is contempt of court.” The father of senior advocate Prashant Bhushan requested the court to present the list of cases when the trial resumed after the corona virus lockdown, but the Supreme Court did not agree.

Meanwhile, in the past, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, senior journalist N. Ram and former Union Minister Arun Shourie have filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the validity of section 2 (c) (i) in the contempt law of the court. This provision declares the publication of the subject matter as a crime, which condemns the court or reduces the authority of the court.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2023 ANN All Rights Reserved