The Supreme Court today let offNarmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) leader Medha Patkar but issued notices to BookerPrize winner Arundhati Roy asking her to show cause why contempt proceedings benot initiated against her for imputing motive to the courts in entertaining apetition against her.
Dismissing proceedings initiated on the basis of a petition filed by a groupof lawyers seeking action against Patkar, Roy and advocate Prashant Bhushan forraising slogans against judiciary during a dharna outside the court, the apexCourt directed notice be issued to Roy asking to show cause why she should notbe proceeded against for contempt.
"Roy has imputed motives to specific Courts for entertaining litigationsor passing orders against her. She has accused Courts of 'harassing' her as ifthe judiciary were carrying out a personal vendetta against her," JusticePal reasoned on the issuance of notice to her.
Advertisement
"We are conscious that Roy has said before us that she stood by thecomments made even if they were held to be contumacious," the Bench saidbut gave her another chance to explain her stand.
The proceedings arose on the petition by few lawyers who alleged that duringthe dharna by NBA activists before the Supreme Court gate in December last year,the three raised slogans against judiciary and judges of the court.
The activists were protesting against the apex Court's decision in Octoberlast year allowing raising of the height of the Sardar Sarovar Dam.
The Court specified three paragraphs of Roy's affidavit, filed in response tothe petition of the lawyers, to be prima facie contemptuous. However, it saidPatkar in her affidavit had not ascribed any personal motive to a Judge.
Advertisement
Giving her the benefit of doubt, Justice Pal said "Her comments aregeneral in nature and may be construed as the expression of a perceived error inthe decision of superior Courts in their contempt jurisdiction.
The Bench said it was not inclined to direct any further inquiry into thealleged raising of slogans by the respondents during the dharna while pointingout several flaws in the petition filEd by the lawyers.
However, it deprecated the staging of dharna by NBA infront of the SupremeCourt. "While holding that a dharna held to protest a decision of a courtmay not per se amount to contempt, we must not be understood as approving theholding of a dharna before the Court," the Bench said.
"On the other hand it is deprecated and must be discouraged otherwiseevery disgruntled litigant could adopt this method of ventilating hisgrievance," it said.
Justice Pal said holding of dharna was either to raise public opinion or toexhibit the extent of public opinion against a decision of a court.
"Judges are required to decide what they think is right according to thelaw applicable and on the material placed before them and not be swayed bypublic opinion on any particular issue," she said.
RELATED STORIES : PTI
02-Aug-2001
Medha, Arundhati dare SC to proceed against them
