The Supreme Court today accepted the unconditional apology of former army chief Gen V K Singh and thus put an end to the contempt of court proceedings initiated by it against him. The court had on its own initiated proceedings for remarks he had made on television and other media.
Ram Jethmalani, representing the general whose remarks about the court decision related to his retirement age provoked the contempt action, submitted before a bench headed by R M Lodha that he withdrew all comments made against the court in all forums.
The court disallowed a lawyer from intervening in the proceedings, observing that “ this matter is exclusively between the court and the contemner (Singh)”. It also dropped proceedings against Indian Express newspaper which had published the remarks which amounted to contempt of court.
Earlier, the court accepted the apology of public interest lawyer Prashant Bhushan who had made certain remarks in Outlook newsweekly about Attorney General G E Vahanvati’s role in the coalscam case. When the matter was initiated by Solicitor General, Bhushan said “I have the highest regard for the court and if the statement of mine has hurt the court, I apologise.” This apology was accepted.
Ram Jethmalani, representing the general whose remarks about the court decision related to his retirement age provoked the contempt action, submitted before a bench headed by R M Lodha that he withdrew all comments made against the court in all forums.
The court disallowed a lawyer from intervening in the proceedings, observing that “ this matter is exclusively between the court and the contemner (Singh)”. It also dropped proceedings against Indian Express newspaper which had published the remarks which amounted to contempt of court.
Earlier, the court accepted the apology of public interest lawyer Prashant Bhushan who had made certain remarks in Outlook newsweekly about Attorney General G E Vahanvati’s role in the coalscam case. When the matter was initiated by Solicitor General, Bhushan said “I have the highest regard for the court and if the statement of mine has hurt the court, I apologise.” This apology was accepted.