Supreme Court: No Initiation of Suo Moto Proceedings Against Rajdeep Sardesai

Supreme Court: No Initiation of Suo Moto Proceedings Against Rajdeep Sardesai

The case status on the Supreme Court of India (SC) website reflected the contempt plea against the journalist Rajdeep Sardesai was registered as a suo motu criminal contempt petition.

The Top Court clarified that it has not initiated any criminal contempt of court proceedings against journalist Rajdeep Sardesai. It further added that the Court's website reflecting that it had taken suo motu cognizance of a contempt plea against Sardesai, was 'an inadvertent mistake'.

The SC further stated "This is in context with news item being flashed in some news channels about initiating suo moto criminal contempt proceeding against Mr. Rajdeep Sardesai by Supreme Court, it is made clear that no such proceeding has been initiated against Mr. Rajdeep Sardesai. However, status shown on the Supreme Court website has been placed inadvertently. Appropriate action to rectify the same is under process."

The website of the SC was reflecting that the case against Sardesai was registered by the Top Court based on a petition filed by Aastha Khurana. The said petition was filed in September 2020 by the petitioner however was registered as a suo motu criminal contempt case in February 2021.

In this matter, Attorney General KK Venugopal had earlier refused to grant consent to Khurana to initiate contempt proceedings against Sardesai.

On the day when Advocate Prashant Bhushan was convicted for contempt of court, Sardesai had tweeted, that "Prashant Bhushan held guilty of contempt by Supreme Court, sentence to be pronounced on August 20. This even as habeas corpus petitions of those detained in Kashmir for more than a year remain pending."

The journalist tweeted when the Apex Court imposed a sentence of Re 1 on Bhushan that "Rs 1 token fine imposed by SC on Prashant Bhushan in the contempt case. If he doesn't pay it, then 3 months jail sentence. Clearly, the Court looking to wriggle out of an embarrassment of its own making."

According to Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act and Rule 3 of Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the SC, the consent of the Attorney General or the Solicitor General is required before the Top Court can hear a criminal contempt petition filed by a private individual.

Khurana had approached the Attorney General Mr. Venugopal seeking permission to initiate contempt proceedings against the journalist. In his reply to Khurana's letter, Venugopal stated that Sardesai's tweets were not so serious that would undermine the dignity of the Court or lower its stature in the minds of the public.

Khurana filed a petition before the Apex Court. She submitted in her plea that not only did "Sardesai question the credibility of this Hon'ble Court judgment, but he has also passed various comments against the Ex-Judges and Ex-Chief Justice of India in past and has also tried to teach the Hon'ble Judges their duties and responsibilities."