The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday came down sharply on former Union minister Maneka Gandhi for her public remarks criticising the court’s orders on the stray dog issue. The court observed that her comments amounted to contempt of court.
During the hearing, the Bench questioned senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, who appeared for Gandhi, on whether he had reviewed his client’s statements. “You said the court should be circumspect in its remarks, but have you heard your client’s podcast?” the Supreme Court said.
The Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria said Gandhi had made “all kinds of comments” against various stakeholders without adequate reflection.
ALSO READ‘Can’t trademark alphabets’: Delhi HC rejects Alkem Laboratories’ bid to protect ‘A to Z’ tag
‘Kasab did not commit contempt’
The judges added that while Gandhi’s statements prima facie constituted contempt, the court was refraining from initiating formal contempt proceedings “out of magnanimity”.
Justice Mehta also asked Ramachandran what steps Gandhi had taken, during her tenure as a Union minister, to address the stray dog problem. The apex court further asked whether Maneka while in power had helped secure budgetary allocations for mitigation of stray dogs.
Ramachandran responded that budgetary allocations were matters of government policy and remarked that he had appeared even for Ajmal Kasab in the past.
“Ajmal Kasab did not commit contempt of court, but your client has,” Justice Nath retorted.
ALSO READ‘No amount of cost enough’: Why the Delhi High Court sided with Prannoy and Radhika Roy
Previous SC observation
The Bench further clarified that its earlier observations on holding dog feeders accountable were made in earnest and not sarcastically, even if they arose during an exchange in court.
On January 13, the top court had indicated it would consider directing states to pay “heavy compensation” in dog bite cases and expressed concern over the failure to implement norms on stray animals for nearly five years.
“Shouldn’t organisations that advocate feeding stray dogs in public places also be held accountable?” the apex court asked. The Supreme Court has been hearing the matter as a suo motu case since July last year. |
