Nupur Sharma case: AG declines consent for contempt action against former Delhi HC judge SN Dhingra, two others for criticising SC
New Delhi, July 14
Attorney General KK Venugopal has refused to give his consent to initiate contempt proceedings against former Delhi High Court judge SN Dhingra and two senior lawyers for criticising the Supreme Court judges who said suspended BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma was responsible for the violence that followed her remarks on Prophet Mohammed.
“I am not satisfied that the criticism made by the three persons named in your letter is with malice or is an attempt to impair the administration of justice, or that it was a deliberate and motivated attempt to bring down the image of the judiciary. In the circumstances, I accordingly decline consent to initiate proceedings to criminal contempt of the Supreme Court,” Venugopal said in a letter to advocate CR Jaya Sukin.
Sukin had sought the AG’s consent for criminal contempt of court action against Dhingra, former Additional Solicitor General Aman Lekhi and senior advocate K Rama Kumar for calling the top court’s observations on Nupur Sharma as “irresponsible, illegal and unfair”.
“I have gone through your request seeking consent to initiate proceedings for criminal contempt against Justice (retd) S N Dhingra, Mr Aman Lekhi and Mr K Rama Kumar senior advocate. I find that the statements made by three persons, who are in the realm of fair comment, on a hearing conducted by the Supreme Court,” the AG wrote.
“The statements are not vituperative or abusive nor are they likely to interfere with the administration of justice by the Supreme Court of India. It may be noted that the Supreme Court, in a large number of judgments, has held that fair and reasonable criticism of judicial proceedings would not constitute contempt of court,” Venugopal wrote.
Advocate CR Jaya Sukin had pointed out that in a TV interview Justice Dhingra had said the Supreme Court has no right to make such remarks and that the court imposed a charge and gave a verdict without listening to Sharma. Justice Dhingra had also termed the top court’s observations in Sharma’s case as ‘irresponsible’, ‘illegal’ and ‘unfair’, he wrote in the letter.
A Vacation Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Pardiwala had on July 1 refused to entertain Sharma’s plea seeking to club all FIRs against her and transfer them to Delhi and commented that she was responsible for the violence that followed her “irresponsible” comments.
