Live
- Sudanese army recaptures capital of Sinnar State in central Sudan
- Kishkindha Kaandam Review: Some movies prove not to compromise in having a good cinematic experience and this is one of them
- Son-rise: Hemant Soren grows taller as tribal leader, makes father proud
- ISL 2024-25: 10-man NorthEast United FC hold on to take three points vs Punjab FC
- BGT 2024-25: Jaiswal’s application, commitment to form a partnership was so impressive, says Gilchrist
- BGT 2024-25: Personally, I am very happy with my performance, says Harshit Rana
- Pakistan's Lahore remains world's most polluted city despite light drizzle
- Asha Nautiyal retains Kedarnath for BJP, to be back as MLA after 12 years
- India leads world in science, innovation research: Minister
- Flash flood in Indonesia's South Tapanuli claims two lives
Supreme Court notice to lawyer Prashant Bhushan on contempt plea by AG and Centre
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought a response from activist and lawyer Prashant Bhushan on contempt pleas by Attorney General KK Venugopal and the Centre for his tweets allegedly criticising the court on the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as interim CBI director
The SC bench said criticising the court may lead to interference in the course of justice. "This issue required to be heard in length,"
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday sought a response from activist and lawyer Prashant Bhushan on contempt pleas by Attorney General KK Venugopal and the Centre for his tweets allegedly criticising the court on the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as interim CBI director.
Bhushan was given three weeks to reply. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Naveen Sinha said it would deal with the larger question of whether it is open for lawyers or any other person to criticise the court in a sub judice matter which would lead to influencing public opinion.
The bench added that criticising the court may also lead to interference in the course of justice. "This issue required to be heard in length, notice issued," the bench said. The bench listed the matter for further hearing on March 7.
