No Contempt Proceedings Against Former Delhi HC Judge, Others Over Criticism Of SC's Remarks On Nupur Sharma

Attorney General KK Venugopal said he was not satisfied that the criticism made by the three people named in the letter was with malice or an attempt to impair the administration of justice.

A vacation bench of justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala had on July 1 severely reprimanded Nupur Sharma for her comment against Prophet Mohammad

Source : Twitter/@NupurSharmaBJP | Getty

New Delhi: Attorney General KK Venugopal has refused sanction to initiate contempt proceedings against former Delhi High Court judge SN Dhingra and two others for criticising the Supreme Court over its oral observations against suspended BJP leader Nupur Sharma. In a letter, advocate CR Jaya Sukin had sought the AG's consent to initiate criminal contempt of court against Dhingra, former additional solicitor general Aman Lekhi and senior advocate K Rama Kumar for calling the top court's observations in Nupur Sharma's case "irresponsible, illegal and unfair".

Venugopal said the statements made by the three people were neither "vituperative or abusive" nor were they likely to interfere with the administration of justice by the Supreme Court.

ALSO READ | Maharashtra CM Eknath Shinde Reduces VAT On Petrol And Diesel — Details

"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 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 judgements, has held that fair and reasonable criticism of judicial proceedings would not constitute contempt of court," the AG said in his letter.

Venugopal said he was not satisfied that the criticism made by the three people named in the letter was with malice or an attempt to impair the administration of justice.

"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," he said.

A vacation bench of justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala had on July 1 severely reprimanded Sharma for her comment against Prophet Mohammad, saying her "loose tongue" has "set the entire country on fire" and that she was "single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country".

Refusing to entertain Sharma's plea for clubbing of FIRs lodged in various states against her for the remark, the bench had said that the comment was made either for cheap publicity, political agenda, or some nefarious activities.