BJP leader seeks KK Venugopal's consent to initiate contempt proceedings against Jagan Mohan Reddy
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay told the attorney-general that the letter to the CJI by the Andhra Pradesh chief minister 'scandalises' the authority of both the Supreme Court and the high court
New Delhi: An advocate Sunday wrote to Attorney General KK Venugopal seeking his consent to initiate contempt proceedings against Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy and his press advisor for making allegations against a Supreme Court judge.
BJP leader and lawyer Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay said the letter by the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister scandalises the authority of both the Supreme Court and the High Court and interferes with the judicial proceedings and the administration of justice.
"Even worse, if this kind of precedent were allowed, political leaders would start making reckless allegations against judges who do not decide cases in their favour and this trend would soon spell the death knell of an independent judiciary," Upadhyay wrote in his letter.
"I am therefore seeking your kind consent under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Rule 3 of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975 to initiate criminal contempt against YS Jagan Mohan Reddy, Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh and Shri Ajeya Kallam, Press Advisor of the Government of Andhra Pradesh," he said.
According to Upadhyay's letter, the actions of these two individuals constitute grave criminal contempt of the Supreme Court of India and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
It has been two weeks since the release of Reddy's letter in the public domain, and as yet, there has been no suo-motu contempt action initiated by the Supreme Court, the advocate said in his letter.
In an unprecedented move, the chief minister wrote to the CJI, alleging that the Andhra Pradesh High Court was being used to "destabilise and topple my democratically elected government."
He had requested the CJI to look into the matter and consider initiating steps "as may be considered fit and proper to ensure that the state judiciary's neutrality is maintained".
The chief minister had alleged that the senior apex court judge had proximity to TDP chief Chandrababu Naidu and that a "former judge of the honourable Supreme Court placed this fact on record".
If Khalistanis can storm Indian High Commission in London, why not give same rights to Argentinian protesters in Delhi?
Time is ripe for the West to realise that India’s patience is running thin. Anyway, friendship can’t be a one-way traffic
Which countries allow same-sex marriage? Will India join the club?
Opposing the legal recognition of same-sex marriages, the Indian government has said that ‘they will cause havoc’. The matter now lies before the Supreme Court. As the debate continues, we look at how nations have approved such unions
Bhopal gas tragedy: Why did India’s Supreme Court reject more compensation for survivors?
Rejecting the Indian government’s curative petition that sought more funds for the victims of the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy, the top court said it would open up Pandora’s box. The American company, Union Carbide, responsible for the disaster had paid the survivors Rs 715 crore in damages in 1989