Thread by @utkarsh_aanand

#SupremeCourt starts hearing the criminal contempt case against adv Prashant Bhushan on the point of punishment to him.

Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari are part of the bench.

Sr adv Dushyant Dave starts by referring to review jurisdiction of the court and the plea by Bhushan to defer the punishment till the review petition is filed and decided.

"I have 30 days to file the review petition and the order (convicting Bhushan) can then be reviewed. So please defer this hearing today," argues Dave.

Justice Mishra retorts: "But this remedy is consequential. You can file a review after our final orders."

"Our judgment will be complete only after we deliver our final order on sentence. How can we stop constitutional orders. But we assure you that even in case of a punishment (jail term), it won't be affected till your review is decided," says #SupremeCourt.

#SupremeCourt clarifies even if Prashant Bhushan were to be given a jail term, it won't be given effect to till the review petition is decided.

Justice Gavai: "Why do you want to give an impression that you want to avoid these proceedings."

Dave: "And why my lordships want to give an impression that this bench wants to decide everything before Justice Arun Mishra retires."

Dave: "Then let the matter of punishment go to a different bench."

Gavai J: "Sorry. We won't accept that request."

#PrashantBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Dave: Heavens aren't doing to fall if sentencing is deferred till the review is decided. It isn't necessary only for this bench to decide the quantum.

Mishra J: Suppose I weren't retiring. Should I have placed this matter before some other bench for deciding the sentence?

"It isn't never done like this. You are asking us to commit the impropriety by asking us to violate the principles how cases are decided in the Supreme Court. It has never been done," adds Justice Mishra.

#PrashantBhushan

Dave: "In the larger interest of people, in larger interest of this institution, the sentencing must be deferred. This can't be hurried like this."

Gavai J: "It was Dr Dhavan's statement on Aug 17 that review was ready to be filed.

Dave: "Ready but why should we file it now?"

Dave: Don't hold counsel to their statements. That won't be fair.wr also have a lot to say but we don't."

Gavai J: We have utmost respect for the bar but we also have to ensure utmost respect for the bench. Both institutions are equally important to us.

#PrashantBhushan

Attorney General KK Venugopal appears in the matter now.

Mishra J: Please don't address us on deferment of sentencing. We aren't inclined to hear you on that. Let them argue on sentencing first. We have kept the matter today for that purpose.

Dave: Ld Attorney had to wait for more than 4 hours on the last day.

Mishra J: Don't remind us. Do you think we aren't aware?

Dave: I am discharging my professional obligation.

Mishra J: Do you think we don't keep that in account?

#PrashantBhushan

Sr adv Rajeev Dhavan, for Bhushan: I am not going to ask for deferment. Let the judges' words be final. Mt Bhushan wants to make a statement.

Bhushan reads out: I am pained not because I can be punished but because I have been misunderstood.

#PrashantBhushan: I am disappointed that the court didn't even give me a copy of the complaint that was the basis

These two tweets represented my bonafide belief, expression of which should be permissible in any healthy democracy.

Higher principles must guide us all in these times. Failing to stand up would have been a dereliction of duty.

My tweets, I consider, was discharge of my highest duty.

Apologising would also be dereliction of my duty.

Inflict any penalty on me which the court considers to be an offence and I consider to be my bonafide duty: #Prashant

Dhavan, now arguing on the point of sentencing: #PrashantBhushan has given a detailed account of what he said, why he said.

I ride a Royal Enfield but when I ride it, I wear a mask. That's my passion.

#SupremeCourt

Vijay Kurle's was a nastiest of cases by nastiest of people...but who is this person before the #SupremeCourt.

Along with Mr Anil Divan, Mr Bhushan created a forum for judicial accountability as they felt there is a need to disclose judicial corruption.

#PrashantBhushan

Dhavan submits from 2G to coal block, from Goa mining to PWC case, from FCRA funding to CVC selection case, all this were Prashant Bhushan's case.

"You must examine who is the person before this court."

#SupremeCourt

Dhavan: You must see if this person is simply attacking the court or is he someone who is trying to bring about changes through administration of justice. And all these cases are pro bono.

#SupremeCourt

When your judgment will reach academy, it will be severely criticised. Over 19 pages was cut and paste from Vijay Kurle's judgment.

Mishra J: Don't worry. We are open to fair criticism. We can take fair criticism.

#PrashantBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Mishra J: We understand balancing..sometime it may happen out of zeal. But it can't happen every time. But Mr Dhavan, you ask only us to do the balancing. Where goes the balancing by the other side? Restraint has to be shown by everyone.

#PrashantBhushan

Mishra J: There is a lakshman rekha for everything. Why cross it? We welcome pursuing good cases in public interest but remember, it is now after conviction. And it is a serious thing. I haven't convicted anyone of contempt in 24 years as a judge. This is my first such order.

Dhavan: There is no substantiation of how these tweets have brought down the majesty of this court. One commentator said it is completely not understandable how two tweets can destroy the institution...Mr Bhushan wasn't even given a copy of the complaint.

#PrashantBhushan

Mishra J: We considered only tweets. There is not even a sentence that we considered. And you haven't disputed the content of your tweets. It was a suo motu matter after all.

#PrashanthBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Dhavan wants judges to read Bhushan's affidavit on justification of his tweets.

Gavai J: But this part wasn't read out to us by Mr Dave.

Dhavan: That's because it could have been embarrassing for the court.

#PrashanthBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Mishra J: If you want to read it, read it and we will deal with it. We will have to then see whether it is a defence or an aggravation. Think over it. Since we will have to then also decide if it is an aggravation.

#SupremeCourt
#PrashanthBhushan

Dhavan: Truth is an absolute defence. I can plead this at any stage of the proceedings. Even if I hadn't filed this affidavit, I can still claim truth as defense.

Dhavan takes name of one CJI from Bhushan's affidavit.

Mishra J asks Dhavan not to take names.

#PrashantBhushan

Dhavan: Hasn't Bhushan provided materials to show truth and his bonafide? That's the question.

People can disagree. When Bhushan said something about a CJI, I said he has gone mad. Everyone is entitled to disagree with what Bhushan to say.

Dhavan: These last six years have been very difficult for this court...for this country.

Mishra J: Let's confine to this case. These statements aren't required.

Dhavan: But that's what these tweets are about

Dhavan: Why a tweet that says historians will examine the last six years should be contempt?

Mishra J: Even those who want to be historians have to show some balance. And nobody is an astrologer. Who has seen tomorrow?

#PrashantBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Mishra J: Freedom of speech isn't absolute..for anyone..to me, to press, to anyone.
We have to tell everyone that this is the line. No problem being an activist but we have to say this is the line.
Right or wrong, we have now found him guilty.

#PrashantBhushan

Justice Mishra addresses AG KK Venugopal, requests him to consider that what should be done when someone who has been convicted of contempt, says he has no remorse. Should we give him some time?

AG: Yes..that would be good. He has done tremendous good.

#PrashantBhushan

AG: This court may give him some time but knowing him for so many years, I can say he has done some tremendous good work.

Mishra J: But that can't allow anyone to cross the lakshman rekha. Also, it isn't about your personal knowledge about him but about law.

Gavai J to #PrashantBhushan: Do you want to reconsider your statement?

Bhushan: No. I don't want to reconsider it.

Mishra J: Okay. Then don't say tomorrow that we don't give you time to do so.

Bhushan: I may reconsider it if my lordships want but there won't be any substantial change. I don't want to waste my lordships time.

Mishra J: You better reconsider it. Don't just apply legal brain here.

Bhushan: I will consult my lawyers then. I will think over.

Mishra J: We don't want to delay the verdict. You reconsider it. We can give you 3-4 days to do it.

#PrashantBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Dhavan: Mr Bhushan's statement has been supported by Justices Lodha, Joseph and Shah. Are they all in contempt now? They have all said procedure you followed was wrong. More than 10,000 people have supported Bhushan.

Mishra J: We gave our verdict in Sec 6 of Hindu Succession Act (giving equal coparcenary right to daughters). Everyone cooperated with us. The lawyers said we should decide it expeditiously.

Dhavan: That's one of the greatest judgements.

AG: I will request you not to punish #PrashantBhushan.

Mishra J: Please don't argue on merits of the case. Have we ever punished anyone in contempt without due procedure. We request you not to make comments without going through what he said in his reply.

Mishra J to AG Venugopal: You please first go through his reply. Consider if that's a defense or an aggravation. Read it and then tell us what we should do. Please address as as the Attorney General, an officer of this court.

#PrashantBhushan

Dhavan: Three judges of this court have commented on the procedure adopted in convicting Bhushan.

Mishra J: Don't invite our comments on this. It isn't right. We may also say something but we don't want to.

#SupremeCourt
#PrashantBhushan

Dhavan now questions why two different yardsticks were applied by the #SupremeCourt when it let go of #Twitter Inc after an apology.

"Sometime an apology may not be given but he has given a statement which he believes to be bonafide."

#PrashantBhushan

Mishra J: When we consider a statement, we have to consider whether it has expression of mistake of not.

"Purpose of sentencing is deterrence so that others don't repeat it. It isn't a person who is punished but it is about deterrence."

#PrashantBhushan

Mishra J: There is no person on earth who can't commit a mistake. A person should be able to realise he has committed a mistake, from the core of his heart. I am not someone who would punish anyone just like that.

#PrashantBhushan

Dhavan: Statements against retired judges may not even amount to contempt. "That's how the law is."

This comes minutes after Dhavan read out statements of retired judges who questioned Bhushan's conviction.

#PrashantBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Mishra J: It is after all about if a person wants to purge the contempt. One should realise where is the line, the lakshman rekha. Criminal contempt has far serious consequences.

We can very lenient when a person realises his mistake & expressed remorse.

Mishra J: Whatever has been done is done. But we want the person concerned to have a sense of remorse. The person must reconsider.

"You may do hundreds good things but that doesn't give you a license to do ten crimes."

#PrashantBhushan
#SupremeCourt

Gavai J: We have said it earlier as well there has to be a mutual respect between the bar and the bench.

Dhavan concludes.

#PrashantBhushan
#SupremeCourt

AG KK Venugopal: I have a list of 5 judges who talked about lack of democracy in the #SupremeCourt. I have a list of nine judges who talked about judicial corruption. Many judges have said it.

Mishra J: We aren't hearing a review. Our conviction order is already here.

Sr adv CU Singh mentions his plea against an order of the registrar refusing an intervention.

SC dismisses this plea.

Hearing concludes. Bhushan gets 2 days to reconsider his statement. Hearing likely on Monday now