Prashant Bhushan Pays Re 1 Fine Imposed by SC in Contempt Case

Advocate and activist Prashant Bhushan on Monday, 14 September, deposited in the Supreme Court Registry the draft of the one rupee fine that was imposed on him by the Supreme Court .

(Photo: Kamran Akhter/The Quint)

Advocate and activist Prashant Bhushan on Monday, 14 September, deposited in the Supreme Court Registry the draft of the one rupee fine that was imposed on him by the Supreme Court in connection with a contempt case related to his recent tweets about the judiciary.

Before entering the registry to pay the fine, Bhushan addressed the media, saying that he had received contributions from many for paying the fine, and that a "truth fund" would be made out of the same to provide legal aid to those persons imprisoned by the State for expressing dissenting opinions, LiveLaw reported.

However, he made it clear that paying the fine did not mean that he had accepted the judgment of the Supreme Court, adding that he would be filing a review petition against the verdict on Monday.

On 12 September, Bhushan filed a writ petition before the apex court, urging it to issue directions declaring that a person convicted for criminal contempt by it, including the petitioner, would have a right to an intra-court appeal to be heard by a larger and different bench, news agency IANS reported. The plea was filed through his counsel Kamini Jaiswal.

The plea contended that the apex court should also issue directions to frame rules and guidelines providing for intra-court appeal against conviction in original criminal contempt cases, and the review petitions filed against orders of conviction by Supreme Court in original criminal contempt cases would be heard in open court by a different bench.

On 31 August, Bhushan announced at a press conference that he would accept the sentence imposed by him by the Supreme Court for contempt earlier during the day – of a Re 1 fine.

However, while he said he would “submit” himself to the order and “respectfully pay the fine as I would have submitted to any other lawful punishment,” he also said he reserved his right to seek a review of the conviction and sentencing.