The Prashant Bhushan Case: Strange Reluctance To Sentence The Offender
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2020-08-26 08:22:24
About the Author
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
It is strange that the Supreme Court is dilly-dallying in punishing Prashant Bhushan for contempt of court. One is saying this because if the court did not have any qualms in finding him guilty of the offence, it should logically not have reservations in handing out the punishment too.
It makes a mockery of justice if the court finds someone guilty of an offence and first allows him time to apologize and then when the offender refuses to do so, says that it expected a different statement from him and proceeds to ask the top lawyers present in court what punishment should it prescribe for him.
Did the court ask anyone before taking suo moto cognizance of his offending tweets? Or before finding him guilty? Then why should it ask about the quantum of punishment. It is upon the court to decide what it considers the optimum punishment for an offence of this nature.
The court has landed itself in an unenviable position by holding Bhushan guilty for contempt. It finds that if it punishes Bhushan too harshly, he will become a martyr and a hero for being the person who stood up to the court and did not let his convictions waver. That will further undermine the authority of the court. If it lets him go with just a warning, the original purpose of taking suo moto cognizance of his tweets to establish the authority and maintain the dignity of the court will not be served.
As the court has said, Bhushan's response to its appeal to him to reconsider his stand was even more derogatory. Then why hesitate in punishing him? If a person says that his conscience does not allow him to offer an insincere apology and if the court has already found him guilty, the matter should end with the court sentencing him as it thinks fit.
At the end of one of the most unusual days of hearings in the Supreme Court, the bench finally reserved the verdict on the quantum of sentence. This means that despite the arguments, pontifications and homilies presented in the court during the day, the judges could not make up their minds about how Bhushan should be punished and left it for another day.
