From Our Bureau
NEW DELHI: Justifying “fair and reasonable criticism” of the Supreme Court’s comments on former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma’s remarks on Prophet Mohammed and Islam, Attorney General K K Venugopal rejected a lawyer’s plea for the contempt-of-court proceedings against former Delhi High Court judge S N Dhingra and two lawyers.
Law requires consent of the Attorney General for the contempt. The plea for contempt was filed by lawyer C R Jaya Sukin against Justice Dhingra as also former additional solicitor general Aman Lekhi and senior advocate K Rama Kumar. The AG refused, saying “the Supreme Court has held in a large number of judgments that fair and reasonable criticism of the judicial proceedings would not constitute contempt of court” particularly when the comments of the three were not abusive.
At the centre of the controversy are observations by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, including that Nupur Sharma “is single-handedly responsible for everything that is happening in the country” after her statements. These observations were criticised by a number of former judges, including Dhingra, and even former army officers.
Nupur Sharma had gone to the Supreme Court demanding that FIRs registered against her across the country should be clubbed and transferred to Delhi. The court, on July 1, refused her plea and made some scathing comments. The judges said Nupur Sharma’s “loose tongue” had “set the entire country on fire”, and that her comments were either for cheap publicity, political agenda or some “nefarious” activities. The observations were, however, oral and not part of the final order.
