Live
- AI Model Detects Residual Brain Tumors in 10 Seconds, Offers Real-Time Surgical Guidance
- Reliance and Disney Complete JV Deal to Strengthen Entertainment Presence in India
- UP Govt Agrees to Protesters’ Demand, PCS Exam to Be Held in One Day
- Trump’s Social Security Tax Promise Faces Hurdles: What Retirees Need to Know
- Strict Action Needed Against Attacks on Government Employees - Retired Employees
- Hyundai Motor India Limited Announces 2024 Edition of ‘Hyundai Always Around’ Campaign
- Minister for Environment, Forests, and Endowments Celebrates Karthika Pournami and Guru Nanak Jayanti
- World Quality Day: Hindustan Zinc Reaffirms Commitment to Superior Product Quality & Innovation
- Grand Kartika Purnima Celebrations at Nagar Kurnool’s Saraswati Shishu Mandir
- Children’s day celebrations, Karnataka remnisences on Nehru’s contributions
Genuine mistake: Prashant Bhushan admits in SC for tweets on fabricated paper
Advocate Prashant Bhushan on Thursday admitted before the Supreme Court that he made a genuine mistake by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of meeting of the highpowered selection committee on the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as an interim CBI director
Attorney General K K Venugopal told the bench that he would like to withdraw his contempt plea filed against Bhushan.
​New Delhi: Advocate Prashant Bhushan on Thursday admitted before the Supreme Court that he made a "genuine mistake" by tweeting that the government had perhaps submitted fabricated minutes of meeting of the high-powered selection committee on the appointment of M Nageswara Rao as an interim CBI director.
Attorney General K K Venugopal told a bench comprising justice Arun Mishra and Navin Sinha that in view of Bhushan's statement, he would like to withdraw his contempt plea filed against the noted lawyer.
However, Bhushan filed an application in the court seeking recusal of Justice Arun Mishra from hearing the contempt petition filed by Venugopal.
Bhushan also refused to tender an unconditional apology before the bench for seeking Justice Mishra's recusal.
Venugopal told the court that he stood by his earlier statement that he did not want any punishment for Bhushan in the matter.
The bench, however, said it would consider the larger issue of whether a person can criticise the court in a sub-judice matter to influence public opinion.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing on April 3.
