The top court on August 14 had held Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for his derogatory tweets against the judiciary saying they cannot be said to be a fair criticism of the functioning of the judiciary made in the public interest. The apex court had said it would hear on August 20, the arguments on the quantum of sentence to be awarded to Bhushan in the matter. A contemnor can be punished with simple imprisonment of up to six months or with a fine of up to Rs 2,000 or with both.
Bhushan, in his application, stated that he intends to file a review petition against the order of August 14 after studying it in detail and seeking appropriate legal counsel as the ramification of the said order is of grave Constitutional significance, in particular on the right to free speech. The Bar Association of India (BAI) had come out in support of Bhushan.
Bhushan had defended his two alleged contemptuous tweets—on Chief Justice of India (CJI) S.A. Bobde and his four predecessors—saying they were against the judges regarding their conduct in their personal capacity and they did not obstruct administration of justice. On July 22, the top court had issued a show-cause notice to Bhushan after initiating the criminal contempt against him for his two tweets.
The top court had not agreed to the contention of senior advocate Dushayant Dave, representing Bhushan, that apex court's secretary general has allegedly "acted unconstitutionally and illegally" in accepting a "defective contempt petition" filed against him, which was initially placed on the administrative side and later on the judicial side. Referring to a judgement, the apex court had said that it has meticulously followed the law in entertaining the contempt plea and it did not agree to the submission that it be sent to another bench for hearing.
Dave, arguing for Bhushan in the contempt case, had said: "The two tweets were not against the institution. They are against the judges in their personal capacity regarding their conduct. They are not malicious and do not obstruct administration of justice. Bhushan has made immense contribution to the development of jurisprudence and there are at least 50 judgments to his credit," he had said, adding that the court has appreciated his contributions in cases like 2G scam, coal block allocation and in mining matters.
In a 142-page reply affidavit, Bhushan stood by his two tweets and had said the expression of opinion, however outspoken, disagreeable or unpalatable to some, cannot constitute contempt of court. Bhushan, in the affidavit, has referred to several apex court judgements, speeches of former and serving judges on contempt of court and the stifling of dissent in a democracy and his views on judicial actions in some cases.
