Live
- Punjab To Rebrand Aam Aadmi Clinics Following Central Funding Dispute
- First inscribed ‘Sati Shila’ of Odisha deciphered
- India-China Defence Ministers To Meet Following Historic LAC Disengagement Deal
- NBW against ex-BJD MP, 5 others in tribal murder case
- Combing operations on against Maoists, weapons recovered: HM
- Delhi's winter action plan: Govt to set up 250 tents for homeless individuals
- Naik reviews drinking water project
- Eureka! 2 young innovators unleash creativity, dish out AI-enabled solutions
- Worst in the country: Air quality hits severe
- ECoR to upgrade overhead electrification
Supreme Court allows Arun Shourie, N Ram and Prashant Bhushan to withdraw plea on contempt law
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed former Union minister Arun Shourie, journalist N Ram and activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan to withdraw their plea challenging the constitutional validity of a legal provision dealing with criminal contempt for "scandalizing the court".
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed former Union minister Arun Shourie, journalist N Ram and activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan to withdraw their plea challenging the constitutional validity of a legal provision dealing with criminal contempt for "scandalizing the court".
A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra was informed by senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, who was representing the petitioners, that they want to withdraw the plea as several petitions on the same issue are pending before the apex court and they don't want "this to be entangled" with them.
The bench, also comprising Justices B R Gavai and Krishna Murari, allowed the petition to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate judicial forum, except the apex court.
During the brief hearing conducted through video-conferencing, Dhavan said that at this stage the petitioners want to withdraw the plea with liberty to approach the top court again, maybe after two months.
The petitioners had challenged the constitutional validity of a legal provision dealing with criminal contempt, saying it was violative of freedom of speech and right to equality.
