New Delhi: A petition has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking withdrawal of Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave’s Senior designation for his arguments while defending Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan in a contempt case against him.
The petition has been filed by Sharad Yadav, who has called the submissions made by Dave during the hearing disproportionate, contending that his brashness demolished the dignity of the Supreme Court.
According to Yadav, Dave’s senior designation should be recalled send an unequivocal message to the countrymen, that a person howsoever powerful in his narcissist overdrive, can’t self-assume authority of being judgmental of the Hon’ble Judges conduct and shoot off statements vilifying the Supreme Court, unless backed by legal foundation of binding precedents.
Yadav has stated that except for aggrandisement of self-righteousness and anointing himself as custodian of rectitude and guardian to the conduct of Supreme Court, nothing explains the brashness of Dave to demolish the dignity of the Supreme Court and create judicial/social disorderliness – impacting the fundamental rights of the petitioner.
Yadav has contended that Dave’s conduct in apparently projecting himself as a vanguard amongst the saviours of Supreme Court’s majesty, and loathsomely trashing judicial decisions and denigrating judges who are apparently against his choice is certainly inconsistent with the dignity of Senior Advocate designation.
Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave had made some submissions during the hearing of the contempt case against Prashant Bhushan. Dave has been appearing for Bhushan in the matter, and some of his submissions were as follows:
· Made statement regarding handling of sexual harassment case against ex-CJI Ranjan Gogoi by the Supreme Court. “Look at the case against him. The complainant was reinstated and all charges were dropped. It shows she was speaking the truth. What impression does it give? A judge sits on a Saturday in his own cause regarding sexual harassment.”
· Statement regarding former CJI Gogoi’s nomination to Rajya Sabha: “Him getting a Rajya Sabha seat right after retirement raises a question mark over his decision in cases like Rafale, Ayodhya, etc.”
· Questioned why politically sensitive cases were allotted only to certain judges and why such cases were never given to judges like Justice R F Nariman.
· Statement regarding SC’s unconcern on Article 370 cases, habeas corpus pleas, etc stated that anyone would be anguished at such responses from the Judiciary.
– India Legal Bureau