In the fag end of last July 2020, Mr. GS Vasu wrote an article with a heading “My Lords, the threat of contempt is not the Remedy.” This was written in connection with the contempt notice issued by SC to Advocate Mr. Prashant Bhushan. The other articles like “the chilling effect of criminal contempt“ And “A mortar cycle and the art of court management“ in another English News Daily etc have been coming. The July 28th Article, the acerbic, bold editorial had emphatically called for revisiting the idea of “scandalising“ in contempt law and ushering in judicial accountability. Those who matter in Judiciary could heed to such advice, which could only enhance the image and reputation of the top court, and our judicial system.

Prashant Bhushan, a very senior Advocate of SC and indefatigable campaigner of public causes, had posted two tweets one of them by and large factual, the other a comment against four past CJs. He could have been wrong in respect of the latter but it was a citizen’s perception of Judiciary. Yet contempt has been preferred suo moto, on the ground that the remark has brought the administration of justice into disrepute and sought the assistance of Attorney General KK Venugopal in the proceedings. Its true SC as an institution has to be defended when it acts within constitutional limits. However, an evaluation as to whether it has acted within such limits or preserved constitutional principles is a matter of opinion and does not amount to contempt. Mr. Bhushan must be a great activist and bold defender of people’s rights. Far from undermining the judiciary, he seems to be one who strongly believes in the strengthening of institutions through a healthy criticism. In   InduBhan’s Book about India’s top seven lawyers Bhushan is one. Venugopal ironically said,” we need more lawyers like Prashant.“ If leaders of the Bar and press do not critically evaluate the judiciary, democracy and the rule of law would be in peril. When asked about the judgments being criticised Justice Krishna Iyer said  "there is not enough criticism “ Such statesmanship is missing today. P Shiva Shankar the then Union Law Minister said in 1987 that SC essentially comprises people from the elite and had become a haven for “FERA violators, bride burners, and reactionaries”. But SC merely felt he could have avoided such harsh language. So instead of facing up to the facts, the SC is busy issuing notices to those who are taking pains to point out the decline of institutions tasked with upholding the constitution. The perception now is that Court sometimes doesn’t show a red light to the powers that be when they try to implement a political agenda in contravention to the letter and spirit of the constitution. The court must assert its independence and make it clear that it’s not amenable to be co-opted.

In a democracy, everyone has the right to dissent. The initiation of contempt proceedings by the judiciary against them is an attempt to stop such criticism. Are judges as humans not liable to err? Is corruption in the judiciary is a rarity?