(Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah, JJ.)
Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 2 of 2020
Shrirang Katneshwarkar and Others ________________ Petitioner(s);
v.
Kunal Kamra ___________________________ Contemnor/Respondent.
With
Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 1 of 2020
Abhyudaya Mishra _________________________________ Petitioner;
v.
Kunal Kamra __________________________ Contemnor/Respondent.
With
Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 3 of 2020
Skand Bajpai ____________________________________ Petitioner;
v.
Kunal Kamra _________________________ Contemnor/Respondent.
Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 2 of 2020; Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 1 of 2020; and Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 3 of 2020, decided on December 18, 2020
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. These petitions have filed, first by an Advocate of this Court and other two by Law Students for initiating criminal contempt proceedings against the respondent for scandalising this Court and lowering the authority of this Court by publishing tweets on twitter handle of the alleged contemnor.
2. The contempt petitions have been filed after obtaining consent of learned Attorney General for India. Learned Attorney General for India vide his letter dated November 12, 2020 granted consent on the request of the applicant to proceed by way of initiating contempt proceedings against Shri Kunal Kamra-respondent. Learned Attorney General in his consent letter dated November 12, 2020 states:
“I am in receipt of your request for consent to initiate proceedings by way of criminal contempt against Sh. Kunal Kamra. I have gone through each one of the tweets which you have annexed for consent to proceed by way of extracting below are not only in bad taste but clearly cross the line between humour and contempt of the Court.
……..……..……..
I find that today people believe that they can boldly and brazenly condemn the Supreme Court of India its judges by exercising what they believe is their freedom of speech. But under the Constitution, the freedom of speech is subject to the law of contempt and I believe that it is time that people understand that attacking the Supreme Court of India unjustifiedly and brazenly will attract punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1972.
I therefore grant consent to proceed by way of initiating contempt proceedings against Sh. Kunal Kamra.”
3. Issue notice returnable within six weeks. The respondent-contemnor not to appear in person.
CONMT. PET.(Crl.) No. 1/2020
Abhyudaya Mishra ________________________________ Petitioner
v.
Kunal Kamra ___________________________________ Respondent
(FOR IA No. 121797/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT and IA No. 122474/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT and IA No. 121791/2020-PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON)
WITH
CONMT. PET.(Crl.) No. 3/2020 (XVII)
(FOR IA No. 119928/2020-EX-PARTE AD-INTERIM RELIEF and IA No. 120246/2020-PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON)
CONMT. PET.(Crl.) No. 2/2020 (XVII)
Date: 18-12-2020 These petitions were called on for orders today.
(Before Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR
Petitioner-in-person
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
4. Issue notice returnable within six weeks in terms of the signed order.
5. The respondent – contemnor not to appear in person.
———
