K.K. Venugopal, the Attorney General of India, refused to grant his consent for initiation of contempt proceedings against former Supreme Court Judge, Justice Markandey Katju, who is alleged to have to make unacceptable remarks in the Nirav Modi Extradition case.
The plea had been filed by an advocate and the Attorney General recused himself from dealing with this plea on the ground that he had known Justice Katju for over sixteen years and thus it might not valid for him to deal with this matter.
However, the applicant had been advised to approach either the Attorney General or Solicitor General of India i.e. Sh. Tushar Mehta and seek their consent for initiating the contempt proceedings. The AG gave this advice in furtherance of its power under Section 15(3).
The applicant, Advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava has alleged that Justice Katju tried to scandalize the apex authority of India judiciary by stating before a court in the United Kingdom that the Supreme Court of India has surrendered before the ruling government.
The applicant alleged that such contemptuous remarks bear the capacity to lower the authority’s respect and faith in the Indian judiciary and bring disrepute to the system of administration of justice.
The applicant had also placed the evidence in his plea which stated that Justice Katju allegedly tried to portray that the Indian Legal System has been politicized. He also mentioned an order of District Court of UK which rejected the challenge made by Nirav Modi against his extradition to India.
The applicant also pointed out the instances which Justice Katju mentioned before the UK Court and stated that the latter tried to undermine the capability of Supreme Court of India by making comments on its independent aspect as an authority.
The applicant used phrases like “bidding of Indian government” in context of Chief Justice of India. The applicant concluded his plea by stating that such remarks affect both, apex authority of India as well as Chief Justice of India.
Leave a Reply