Misplaced Pages

Prashant Bhushan: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:08, 6 June 2013 edit117.196.49.122 (talk)No edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 03:00, 14 December 2024 edit undoBD2412 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, IP block exemptions, Administrators2,449,858 editsm clean up spacing around commas and other punctuation, replaced: ] , , [Tag: AWB 
(523 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Indian activist, lawyer and politician}}
{{Use British English|date=May 2012}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2012}} {{EngvarB|date=March 2014}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2014}}
{{Infobox person {{Infobox person
|image = | name = Prashant Bhushan
| native_name_lang =
|name = Prashant Bhushan
| image = Prashant Bhushan.png
|image_size =
| spouse = Deepa Bhushan
|alt =
| children = 3
|caption = Prashant Bhushan
|birth_date = 23/06/1956 | birth_date = {{Birth date and age|df=yes|1956|10|15}}
| birth_place = ], ], ]
|nationality = Indian
| alma_mater = ], ]
|known_for = anti corruption activism
|occupation = Lawyer | occupation = ]
}}
|party =
'''Prashant Bhushan''' (born 15 October 1956) is an Indian author and a public interest lawyer in the ]. He was a member of the faction of the ] (IAC) movement known as ] which supported ]'s campaign for the implementation of the ]. After a split in IAC, he helped Team Anna form the ]. In 2015, he made several allegations against the party's leadership, its functioning and its deviation from the core ideology, values and commitments. He is one of the founders of ] and Sambhaavnaa, an Institute of Public Policy and Politics.
}}


==Early life & education==
'''Prashant Bhushan''' ({{lang-hi|प्रशांत भूषण}}) (born 1956) is an advocate practising in the ] in Delhi and a social activist.
He has been involved in many ] cases and is a senior member of "]", which supports ] in his anti-corruption campaign.
He has drawn controversy over various statements, including accusing chief judges of corruption and supporting a plebiscite for Kashmir separatists.


Prashant Bhushan is the oldest of the three children of ] and Kumud Bhushan. His father is a lawyer-activist and a former Union Law Minister in the ] government.<ref name="ToI_2011_agent">{{cite news |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-toi/special-report/Citizen-Anna-and-agent-Prashant/articleshow/7931100.cms |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111106001338/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-04-10/special-report/29402905_1_bofors-case-prashant-bhushan-narmada-dam |url-status=live |archive-date=6 November 2011 |title=Citizen Anna and agent Prashant |date=10 April 2011 |first=Rashmi Roshan |work=] |last=Lall }}</ref>
==Birth and education==


Bhushan was educated at St. Joseph's High School, Prayagraj,<ref name=":1">{{cite news |url=https://www.thehindu.com/society/the-independence-of-the-judiciary-has-collapsed-prashant-bhushan/article33193377.ece|title=Prashant Bhushan interview &#124; 'The independence of the judiciary has collapsed' |newspaper=The Hindu |date=29 November 2020 |last1=Sampath |first1=G. }}</ref> and at the ].<ref>{{cite news |title=Prashant Bhushan, AAP and the forbidden K-word |url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/prashant-bhushan-aap-and-the-forbidden-k-word/story-YHfkorxTrCfxsNkqxBKopN.html |work=Hindustan Times |date=8 January 2014 |language=en}}</ref> Bhushan, who dropped out of ] after first semester<ref>{{Cite news|last=Sampath|first=G.|date=2020-11-27|title=The independence of the judiciary has collapsed: Prashant Bhushan|language=en-IN|work=The Hindu|url=https://www.thehindu.com/society/the-independence-of-the-judiciary-has-collapsed-prashant-bhushan/article33193377.ece|access-date=2021-01-16|issn=0971-751X}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|title=Prashant Bhushan: The importance of being Prashant Bhushan - Times of India|url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/the-importance-of-being-prashant-bhushan/articleshow/77831756.cms|access-date=2021-01-16|website=The Times of India}}</ref> and briefly attended ] has a degree in law from ]. While still a student, Bhushan wrote '']'', a book on the case that set aside ] in 1974.<ref name="HT_dock_2010">{{cite news |url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/Comment/ColumnsOthers/The-man-who-put-Raja-in-the-dock/Article1-640152.aspx |title=The man who put Raja in the dock |first=Nagendar |last=Sharma |date=19 December 2010 |work=Hindustan Times |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140111124230/http://www.hindustantimes.com/Comment/ColumnsOthers/The-man-who-put-Raja-in-the-dock/Article1-640152.aspx |archive-date=2014-01-11}}</ref><ref name="Careers360_engage_2014"/> Bhushan has a B.A and L.L.B degree from Allahabad University. He dropped out of Princeton University's Ph.D program, but obtained an M.A in philosophy of science.<ref name=":1" />
Prashant is the son of ], who was union minister for law in the government of ] between 1977 and 1979.
Bhushan dropped out of studying electrical engineering at the ] after a semester. He then studied first economics and then philosophy of science at ] but left before graduating and returned to India where he received a law degree from ].<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main40.asp?filename=Ne060908thehouseofbhushan.asp
|journal=Tehelka Magazine |volume=5 |issue=35 |date=6 September 2008
|title=The House Of Bhushan
|author=VIJAY SIMHA
|accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref>


== Legal activism ==
==Career==


Bhushan was drawn to public activism, influenced by his father. His main areas of interest have been human rights, ] and accountability of the public servants. He is associated with various organisations including the ] (CPIL), ] (PUCL), and ] (India).<ref name=Unilawonline>{{cite web |url=http://www.unilawonline.com/Luminaries/legal_luminaries.aspx |title=Legal Luminaires – Prashant Bhushan |work=Unilawonline |access-date=27 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120425070827/http://www.unilawonline.com/Luminaries/legal_luminaries.aspx |archive-date=25 April 2012 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all }}</ref> He is also the convenor of the Working Committee of the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.judicialreforms.org/working_committee.ht |publisher=Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms |title=Working Committee |access-date=30 April 2012}}{{dead link|date=January 2018}}</ref>
Prashant Bhushan began practising as an advocate in the ] in 1983, specialising in ].
His main areas of interest have been Human Rights, the Environment and ensuring that public servants are accountable.
He is associated with various organisations including the ], ], ] and ] (India).<ref name=Unilawonline/>
As of 2012 Bhushan was the convenor of the Working Committee of the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.judicialreforms.org/working_committee.htm
|publisher=Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms
|title=Working Committee
|accessdate=30 April 2012}}</ref>


Bhushan states that he has taken up about 500 cases dealing with "good causes". His family background allowed him to work on a ] basis for such cases: according to him, he effectively spends only 25 per cent of his time on paid cases, charging 5 per cent of what other lawyers charge. He has criticised the other professional lawyers as "amoral", and claims that he never takes up a case unless he feels that his client is "morally right".<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.outlookindia.com/blog/story/who-is-prashant-bhushan/2478 | title=Who Is Prashant Bhushan?}}</ref>
===Centre for Public Interest Litigation===


=== Judicial accountability ===
Bhushan has acted as an advocate for the ] (CPIL) on several occasions.
In October 1997 the ] heard a CPIL petition over the award of contracts to ] and ] to develop the ], and issued notices to the involved companies and government organisations. Prashant Bhushan acted as advocate for CPIL. The petition claimed an inquiry was justified on the basis of testimony that Reliance had bribed the minister of petroleum, ], to get the award.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.rediff.com/business/oct/14panna.htm
|work=Rediff
|date=14 October 1997
|title=Notices to Centre, CAG, Enron, Reliance on Panna-Mukta oilfield
|accessdate=30 April 2012}}</ref>
The CPIL won a major victory in 2003 when the Supreme Court restrained the Central government from privatising ] and ] without the approval of Parliament.<ref name=Rautray20110304/>
As counsel for the CPIL, ] and Bhushan argued that the only way to disinvest in the companies would be to repeal or amend the Acts by which they were nationalised in the 1970s.<ref>{{cite book |ref=harv |url=http://books.google.ca/books?id=d4KUbiQ-9KoC&pg=PA301 |page=301
|title=Two Score and Ten: My Experiences in Government
|first=G. V. |last=Ramakrishna
|publisher=Academic Foundation |year=2004 |ISBN=81-7188-339-7}}</ref>
As a result, the government would need a majority in both houses to push through any privatisation.<ref>{{cite book
|url=http://books.google.ca/books?id=ZBuUNzIgJjAC&pg=PA136 |page=136
|title=Privatisation And Labour Restructuring
|author=Gopal Ganesh
|publisher=Academic Foundation |year=2008 |ISBN=81-7188-634-5}}</ref>


Bhushan says that he envisages a transparent and honest legal system, where people can negotiate their own cases without the need of any lawyers. In 1990, he and his father formed the ] (CJA) to fight corruption in the judiciary. The organisation comprised some lawyers and ex-judges. Prashant Bhushan started focusing more on this issue in 1993, after the Supreme Court Justice ] was not impeached by parliament on corruption charges. In 2007, the Bhushans expanded CJA to include citizens and form the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reform (CJAR).<ref name="Tehelka_House_2008">{{cite news |url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main40.asp?filename=Ne060908thehouseofbhushan.asp |publisher=Tehelka |volume=5 |issue=35 |date=6 September 2008 |title=The House of Bhushan |first=Vijay |last=Simha |access-date=20 November 2010 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130105031447/http://www.tehelka.com/story_main40.asp?filename=Ne060908thehouseofbhushan.asp |archive-date=5 January 2013 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
Shanti and Prashant Bhushan were council for the CPIL seeking a direction from the Supreme Court that ]s who had converted to Christianity should be entitled to the same reservation they had enjoyed as members of ]. The Union government said this was purely a legislative matter, but in February 2005 the Supreme Court decided to again review the constitutional issue.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2005-02-12/india/27850355_1_dalit-christians-reservation-benefits-sikhism
|work=Times of India
|title=SC to examine quota for Dalit Christians
|date=12 February 2005
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
In February 2005 Bhushan and ] were counsel for CPIL seeking quashing of the CVC Act, 2003, which requires the CBI to obtain permission from the Union government before registering corruption cases against senior bureaucrats. Bhushan argued that the act violated the basic rights of citizens and was counter to the rule of law. The Supreme Court referred the question to a constitution bench of five judges.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2005-02-04/delhi/27833262_1_single-directive-cvc-bill-cvc-act
|work=The Times of India
|title=SC refers to a constitution bench
|author=RAKESH BHATNAGAR
|date=4 February 2005
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


In 2009, Prashant Bhushan represented activist ], asking for the Supreme Court and High Court judges to be brought under RTI. The judges were forced to declare their assets and post it on the court websites.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/>
Bhushan represented the CPIL in a petition asking for the removal of ] from office as Chief Secretary of ] for alleged corruption.
Yadav had been named in five CBI corruption cases and 23 departmental proceedings.
In October 2005 the Supreme Court directed the ] state government to remove her from her position.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_mulayam-honours-sc-verdict-neera-yadav-goes_4761
|work=DNA
|title=Mulayam honours SC verdict, Neera Yadav goes
|date=6 October 2005
|author=Rakesh Bhatnagar
|accessdate=-2012-04-29}}</ref>
Yadav managed to stall her prosecution, but in December 2006 the Supreme Court removed all obstacles to her trial.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-12-08/lucknow/27801673_1_neera-yadav-prosecution-sanction-apex-court
|work=Times of India
|title=Neera Yadav may find herself in trouble
|author=Pervez Iqbal Siddiqui
|date=8 December 2006
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
The case became the first in which an IAS officer of ] was convicted of corruption.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main14.asp?filename=hub110505those_who_CS.asp
|title=Those who make the grade
|work=Tehelka |date=11 May 2005 |accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>


In a 2009 interview, Bhushan alleged that at least half of the 16 former Chief Justices in the Supreme Court were corrupt. ] filed a contempt case against him in 2010, and the Supreme Court asked Bhushan to apologise. In response, Bhushan submitted an explanation stating why he felt those judges were corrupt.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?263230|title=My Honest And Bonafide Perception|first=Prashant |last=Bhushan|publisher=Outlook|date=9 December 2009|access-date=7 October 2013}}</ref> The Bhushans noted the difficulty of getting documentary evidence because judges are immune from investigation.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main47.asp?filename=Ne021010Chief_Injustices.asp |title=Chief Injustices – Excerpts from a milestone affidavit |publisher=Tehelka |date=2 October 2010 |access-date=27 April 2012}}</ref> ], a former Supreme Court judge, said that either the Bhushans should be punished for making "false charges" or an independent authority should be set up to scrutinise their allegations.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.dawn.com/2010/10/22/judiciary-on-trial-by-kuldip-nayar.html |title=Judiciary on Trial |first=Kuldip |last=Nayar |publisher=Dawn |location=Pakistan |access-date=27 April 2012}}</ref>
In 2006 Bhushan represented the CPIL in a petition alleging that Pepsico and Coca-Cola were failing to warn the public of harmful ingredients in their beverages, and were luring young children through misleading advertising.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-08-05/india/27800209_1_soft-drinks-cola-case-coca-cola
|title=Court to hear cola case after 6 weeks
|date=5 August 2006
|work=Times of India
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
In 2007, Bhushan filed a petition on behalf of the CPIL with the ] to investigate whether there had been kickbacks in the ]. The High Court took a strong line with the investigating agency, saying "We feel dissatisfied with that you've done so far. If you've tried to shield someone, then we will come down very heavily on you".<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://books.google.ca/books?id=SjEEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA26
|date=21 January 2008 |volume=48 |issue=3 |journal=Outlook
|title=A Sea of Subterfuge
|author=Saikat Datta
|accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref>


Bhushan has recommended amendment to the Contempt of Court Act clause, stating that some of its clauses effectively prevent the press from exposing the corruption in the judiciary. He has also opposed the rule which prevents people from registering a ] against a judge without the permission of the Chief Justice of India.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.barandbench.com/brief/4/1066/conversation-with-prashant-bhushan |archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20101029215946/http://www.barandbench.com/brief/4/1066/conversation%2Dwith%2Dprashant%2Dbhushan|title=Conversation with Prashant Bhushan |work=Bar & Bench |date=25 October 2010 |access-date=27 April 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-date=29 October 2010 }}</ref>
Prashant Bhushan acted for the CPIL when it took the lead in filing a suit against the ] for ] for 2G mobile telephones. The CPIL petition alleged that the government had lost $15.53 billion by issuing spectrum in 2008 based on 2001 prices, and by not following a competitive bidding process.<ref>{{cite journal
|url=http://books.google.ca/books?id=qByYM-awD_MC&pg=PA6 |page=6
|journal=India Telecom Monthly Newsletter |date=October 2010
|editor=Hui Pan
|title=ED tells SC that 2G spectrum scam probe is underway
|publisher=Information Gatekeepers Inc}}</ref>
In September 2011 Bhushan presented evidence that appeared to disprove the claim by the ] (CBI) that ], the former telecom minister, had not applied undue pressure to the owner of ] to sell to the ] group of Malaysia. Bhushan said the CBI's investigation had been "less than honest".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-09-07/india/30122554_1_maxis-group-aircel-t-ananda-krishnan
|title=2G scam: NGO to counter CBI on Maran
|date=7 September 2011
|work=Times of India
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
In January 2012 Bhushan questioned why the CBI had failed to lay charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act against companies such as ] and ] despite strong evidence against them.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/2g-scam-sc-seeks-cbi-ed-response-on-charges-they-are-soft/896206/
|work=The Indian Express
|title=2G scam: SC seeks CBI, ED response on charges they are soft
|date=5 January 2012
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
In February 2012 the Supreme Court declared the allocation of spectrum had been illegal.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.keralaw.com/judgments/case-number/writ-petition-civil/wpcno423of2010-centreforpublicinterestlitigationandothersvsunionofindiaandothers
|date=2 February 2012
|title=Dr. Subramanian Swamy ...Petitioner versus Union of India and others ...Respondents
|work=Keralaw
|accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref>


=== Government accountability ===
===Team Anna===


In 1990, Bhushan wrote a book ''Bofors, the selling of a nation'' (1990) on the ].<ref name="Careers360_engage_2014">{{cite news |url=http://university.careers360.com/articles/Prashant-Bhushan-Engage-in-issues-of-public-interest |title=Prashant Bhushan: "Engage in issues of public interest!" |first=Mahesh |last=Peri |date=6 January 2014 |publisher=Careers360 }}</ref>
On 30 January 2011 there were "India against Corruption" marches across the country to demand a strong ] by passing the ] for independent oversight of politicians and bureaucrats.
Prashant Bhushan and his father Shanti Bhushan were among the marchers in Delhi.
Others prominent protesters included ], ], Sri Sri ], ], ], ], ] and ].<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-01-28/delhi/28361639_1_lokpal-bill-corruption-kiran-bedi
|title=Activists to march against corruption
|date=28 January 2011
|work=Times of India
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
At another anti-corruption rally on 26 February 2011 the activist ] said he would start an indefinite fast on 5 April unless decisive action was taken on the Lokpal Bill.
Prime Minister ] invited Hazare, Swami Agnivesh, Prashant and Shanti Bhushan and Kiran Bedi to meet with him on 7 March.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.sify.com/news/activists-to-meet-pm-on-lokpal-bill-news-national-ldgw4gafgbe.html
|title=Activists to meet PM on Lokpal Bill
|work=sify News
|date=6 March 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Anna Hazare nominated Prashant Bhushan and his father Shanti as civil society members of the joint committee constituted in April 2011 to draft the Lokpal Bill.<ref name=Express20110411/>
Other civil society members were Hazare himself, ] Lokayukta (ombudsman) ] and ].
All these members decided to declare their assets.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://english.samaylive.com/nation-news/676485556/anna-hazare-associates-to-declare-assets.html
|date=15 April 2011
|work=Samay Live
|title=Anna Hazare, associates to declare assets
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>


CPIL won a major victory in 2003 when the Supreme Court restrained the Union government from privatising ] and ] without the approval of Parliament.<ref name=Rautray20110304>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110304/jsp/nation/story_13665807.jsp |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130105002024/http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110304/jsp/nation/story_13665807.jsp |url-status=dead |archive-date=5 January 2013 |publisher=The Telegraph |title=Feather in cap for graft fighters |first1=Samanwaya |last1=Rautra |first2=Pheroze L. |last2=Vincent |date=4 March 2011 |access-date=26 April 2012}}</ref> As counsel for the CPIL, ] and Bhushan argued that the only way to disinvest in the companies would be to repeal or amend the Acts by which they were nationalised in the 1970s.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=d4KUbiQ-9KoC&pg=PA301 |page=301 |title=Two Score and Ten: My Experiences in Government |first=G. V. |last=Ramakrishna |publisher=Academic Foundation |year=2004 |isbn=81-7188-339-7}}</ref>
In May 2011 Bhushan said "The basic idea of an empowered Lokpal is that it will have full autonomy, independence from the government, power to investigate complaints of corruption and prosecute all public servants, among other. This principle is non-negotiable".
He said that only the details were open for discussion.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.sify.com/news/basic-principles-of-lokpal-bill-not-negotiable-says-prashant-bhushan-news-national-lfxwanjfcbc.html
|work=Sify News
|title=Basic principles of Lokpal Bill not negotiable, says Prashant Bhushan
|date=23 May 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
The Team Anna "Jan Lokpal Bill" had eleven members accountable to the Supreme Court, and supervised by complaint authorities.
The Central Bureau of Investigation anti-corruption unit would report to the Jan Lokpal, thus maintaining independence from the government in investigations.<ref name=Express20110808/>
Later in May Bhushan and fellow civil-society member ] said the government was breaking its word by saying the Lokpal should not be able to investigate the Prime Minister. The government was also against letting the Lokpal investigate senior judges, defence services and the conduct of MPs within parliament. The only scope for Lokpal investigations would be corruption by MPs outside parliament, and a small number of senior civil servants.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2063347.ece
|date=31 May 2011
|title=Government going back on its word: Kejriwal
|work=The Hindu
|author=K. BALCHAND
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
At this point a breakdown in the talks seemed inevitable.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/cracks-in-the-lokpal-panel-109097
|title=Jan Lokpal Bill panel headed for a breakdown?
|date=30 May 2011
|work=NDTV
|accessdate-2012-04-28}}</ref>


Bhushan represented the CPIL in a petition asking for the removal of ] from office as Chief Secretary of ] for alleged corruption. Yadav had been named in five CBI corruption cases and 23 departmental proceedings. In October 2005 the Supreme Court directed the ] state government to remove her from her position.<ref>{{cite news
In June 2011 Bhushan pointed out that key proposals made by Team Anna had been omitted from the latest government draft. These included the power to tap telephones and to recommend that public authorities change their work practices to make corruption less likely and to prevent victimisation of whistle blowers. Lokpal should also be able to recommend cancellation of contracts and blacklisting of firms or people involved in corrupt practices. The CBI anti-corruption wing should come under Lokpal and be independent of the central government.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_mulayam-honours-sc-verdict-neera-yadav-goes_4761 |publisher=DNA |title=Mulayam honours SC verdict, Neera Yadav goes |date=6 October 2005 |first=Rakesh |last=Bhatnagar |access-date=2012-04-29}}</ref> The case became the first in which an ] officer in Uttar Pradesh was convicted of corruption.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main14.asp?filename=hub110505those_who_CS.asp |title=Those who make the grade |publisher=Tehelka |date=11 May 2005 |access-date=27 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120208012724/http://www.tehelka.com/story_main14.asp?filename=hub110505those_who_CS.asp |archive-date=8 February 2012 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all }}</ref>
|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2125762.ece
|work=The Hindu
|date=22 June 2011
|title=Lokpal: key proposals made by Hazare team missing from govt. draft
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


In February 2006, as counsel for Lok Sevak Sangh, Bhushan submitted to the Supreme Court that the MP Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) might not be constitutionally valid. A TV channel had recently aired video of a sting in which it appeared that some MPs had taken bribes under the scheme. Bhushan said none of the normal controls were being applied, and the scheme was breeding corruption.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/MPLADS-comes-under-judicial-scrutiny/articleshow/1418038.cms|title=MPLADS comes under judicial scrutiny |date=16 February 2006 |publisher=Outlook |access-date=29 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120429030711/http://news.outlookindia.com/ |archive-date=29 April 2012 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all }}</ref> The same year, Bhushan also represented the CPIL in a petition alleging that ] and ] were failing to warn the public of harmful ingredients in their beverages, and were luring young children through misleading advertising.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-08-05/india/27800209_1_soft-drinks-cola-case-coca-cola |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130103083732/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-08-05/india/27800209_1_soft-drinks-cola-case-coca-cola |url-status=dead |archive-date=3 January 2013 |title=Court to hear cola case after 6 weeks |date=5 August 2006 |work=] |access-date=29 April 2012}}</ref>
That month Baba Ramdev began an "indefinite fast against corruption".
Bhushan criticised Ramdev's decision to share his platform with leaders from the ] organisations ] and ].<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2077377.ece
|work=The Hindu
|date=5 June 2011
|title=RSS, VHP presence at fast venue irks Prashant Bhushan
|author=RAKTIMA BOSE
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


Bhushan filed a PIL challenging the appointment of P.J. Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner, after Thomas had been charged in the ]. In March 2011, SC struck down the appointment.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/>
On 4 August 2011 the government's version of the Lokpal bill was tabled in the ].<ref name=Ntrackindia20110810/>
Bhushan said the government's draft should be called the "Promotion of Corruption Bill 2011" or the "Protection of Corrupt Public Servants Bill 2011".
He said the bill was designed to protect the corrupt and to deter complaints.<ref name=Express20110808/>
On 10 August Bhushan said Team Anna demanded that this version be withdrawn.
He said: "We are going to put forward our views, that how the Bill prepared by the government will encourage corruption instead of curbing it and will provide protection to the corrupt officials".<ref name=Ntrackindia20110810/>


Prashant Bhushan acted for the CPIL when it took the lead in filing a suit against the ] for ] for 2G mobile telephones. The CPIL petition alleged that the government had lost $15.53 billion by issuing spectrum in 2008 based on 2001 prices, and by not following a competitive bidding process.<ref>{{cite journal
Following Hazare's detention for staging a demonstration, on 16 August 2011 Prashant Bhushan said that peaceful protests had been arranged across the country. He said the Delhi police had detained Hazare at the bidding of the cabinet: "There is no freedom for Delhi Police. It has become a puppet, an ornament in the hands of Central government".<ref>{{cite web
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qByYM-awD_MC&pg=PA6 |page=6 |journal=India Telecom Monthly Newsletter |date=October 2010 |title=ED tells SC that 2G spectrum scam probe is underway |publisher=Information Gatekeepers Inc}}</ref> The Supreme Court asked the CBI to probe the irregularities in the auction of 2G spectrum. The inquiry resulted in the resignation of the telecom minister A. Raja, who was later arrested along with others including the DMK MP Kanimozhi, officials of Unitech wireless and officials of Reliance ADAG.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/> In September 2011 Bhushan presented evidence that appeared to disprove the claim by the CBI that ], the former telecom minister, had not applied undue pressure to the owner of ] to sell to the ] group of Malaysia. Bhushan said the CBI's investigation had been "less than honest".<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-09-07/india/30122554_1_maxis-group-aircel-t-ananda-krishnan |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130103135307/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-09-07/india/30122554_1_maxis-group-aircel-t-ananda-krishnan |url-status=dead |archive-date=3 January 2013 |title=2G scam: NGO to counter CBI on Maran |date=7 September 2011 |work=] |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref> In January 2012 Bhushan questioned why the CBI had failed to lay charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act against companies such as ] and ] despite strong evidence against them.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/2g-scam-sc-seeks-cbi-ed-response-on-charges-they-are-soft/896206/ |publisher=The Indian Express |title=2G scam: SC seeks CBI, ED response on charges they are soft |date=5 January 2012 |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref>
|url=http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-08-16/news/29892324_1_jai-prakash-narain-park-anna-hazare-protest-march
In February 2012 the Supreme Court declared the allocation of spectrum had been illegal.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.keralaw.com/judgments/case-number/writ-petition-civil/wpcno423of2010-centreforpublicinterestlitigationandothersvsunionofindiaandothers |date=2 February 2012 |title=Dr. Subramanian Swamy ...Petitioner versus Union of India and others ...Respondents |work=Keralaw |access-date=26 April 2012 }}{{Dead link|date=May 2020 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>
|work=Economic Times |location=India
|title=Cabinet ministers taking decisions on Hazare's protest: Prashant Bhushan
|date=16 August 2011
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
Later that month Anna Hazare began a hunger strike. Bhushan said the government could not postpone passing a proper ] bill indefinitely.
He reported that Anna Hazare had said he would fast until Hazare's draft Lokpal bill was introduced into parliament and passed, or that he would fast until death.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqpj_pgP6po
|title=Anna Hazare will fast till death: Prashant Bhushan
|work=NewsX
|date=20 August 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
On 28 August Hazare called off his fast. Two days later it was announced that Arvind Kejriwal and Prashant Bhushan would have an informal meeting with ], chairman of the parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice to discuss how the committee would proceed in reconciling the various draft anti-corruption laws, which could take several months.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-08-30/india/29944415_1_lower-bureaucracy-team-anna-lokpal-bill
|work=The Times of India
|title=Kejriwal, Prashant Bhushan to meet Singhvi today
|author=Himanshi Dhawan
|date=30 August 2011
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


In 2012, Bhushan filed a PIL seeking ] by the government on the grounds that certain companies had been illegally favoured by the politicians. In response to the PIL, the Supreme Court (SC) scrutinised coal block allocation since 1993. Bhushan also filed a PIL against illegal iron ore extraction in ], which led to the Supreme Court halting all the mining operations in the state.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/>
In September 2011 Bhushan criticised the proposed National Judicial Oversight Committee.
He said that inclusion of "brother judges" in the committee would prevent it acting impartially, and including two MPs in the committee would compromise judicial independence.
Team Anna had proposed a 5-person committee independent of both the executive and the judiciary.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/bring-the-higher-judiciary-under-lokpal-team-anna/820134.html
|work=IBN Live
|title=Bring the higher judiciary under Lokpal: Team Anna
|date=12 September 2011
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
In January 2012 Bhushan said in a press conference that Team Anna was working on a draft amendment to the constitution that would ensure the people had more say in the framing of laws.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://news.oneindia.in/2012/01/23/nowteam-anna-demands-peoples-participation-in-framinglaw.html
|work=One India News
|title=Now, Team Anna demands people's participation in framing laws
|date=23 January 2012
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Bhushan and Hazare both opposed the ] bill that was eventually introduced by the government, saying in February 2012 that it was very weak.<ref name=Express20120227/>


He successfully challenged the Prime Minister and Home Minister's decision to appoint ] as the head of the ] (CVC).<ref name="ToI_2011_agent"/> Acting on his PIL, SC directed the CVC to apprise it of actions taken on complaints by whistleblowers in the country.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/>
===Other cases===


Prashant Bhushan also represents whisteblower Anand Rai in the ongoing PIL regarding ] in the Supreme Court.{{citation needed|date=March 2024}}
Bhushan has acted on a wide variety of high-profile cases.
In 1992 he initiated a petition in the high court of Karantaka alleging bribery in the Mangalore Power Company project.
After seven years, this was eventually dismissed.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.expressindia.com/fe/daily/19991215/fin15085.html
|work=The Indian Express
|title=Impatient Cogentrix jumped the gun by four days after seven-year wait
|date=15 December 1999
|author=Vivian Fernandes
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
In 1998, as counsel for Arun Kumar Aggarwal, he initiated a ] (PIL) against the Union Government of India and the ] (SEBI) for retaining SEBI chairman D.R. Mehta after his three-year term had expired.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.expresindia.com/fe/daily/19980911/25455654.html
|date=11 September 1998
|title=HC serves show notice on Sebi, centre over Mehta's tenure
|work=The Indian Express
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
Prashant Bhushan and ] were appointed counsel for the four people accused of the ] on 13 December 2001.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.telegraphindia.com/1021214/asp/nation/story_1479887.asp
|work=The Telegraph
|title=December 13 beamed after court nod
|date=14 December 2002
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
The four were found guilty on 16 December 2002.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://hindu.com/2002/12/17/stories/2002121705260100.htm
|work=The Hindu
|title=4 accused in Parliament attack case convicted
|author=Anjali Mody
|date=17 December 2002
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


Before K V Chowdary's appointment Prashant Bhushan raised a red flag,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tehelka.com/2015/06/after-jethmalani-bhushan-explains-why-kv-chowdhary-shouldnt-be-cvc/?singlepage=1 |title=Prashanth Bhushan explains why KV Chowdhary shouldn't be CVC &#124; Tehelka - Investigations, Latest News, Politics, Analysis, Blogs, Culture, Photos, Videos, Podcasts |website=www.tehelka.com |access-date=13 January 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924113858/http://www.tehelka.com/2015/06/after-jethmalani-bhushan-explains-why-kv-chowdhary-shouldnt-be-cvc/?singlepage=1 |archive-date=24 September 2015 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.indiacentral.org/videos/interviews/prashant-bhushan-on-the-new-cvc-appointment-shocking-facts |title=Prashant Bhushan on the new CVC appointment. Shocking Facts |access-date=2015-07-29 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150730035849/http://www.indiacentral.org/videos/interviews/prashant-bhushan-on-the-new-cvc-appointment-shocking-facts |archive-date=30 July 2015 |df=dmy-all }}</ref> asking the Prime Minister not to go ahead with his appointment, raising severe objections on Chowdary's tenure as CBDT Chief. After Chowdary being appointed, NGO Common Cause represented by Prashant Bhushan has filed a petition in ] challenging K V Chowdary's appointment as CVC and T M Bhasin's appointment as VC on 22 July.<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/petition-in-sc-challenging-appointment-of-cvc-and-vc/907582 |title = Petition in SC Challenging Appointment of CVC and VC| date=24 February 2023 }}</ref>
Bhushan assisted the ] activists opposed to the ].<ref name=Unilawonline/>
After six years of hearings, in October 2000 the Supreme court ruled to allow the massive project to recommence. Bhushan criticised the decision for having been made "without any evidence of the facts before the judges".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/arundhati-roy-furious-at-dam-decision-634956.html
|work=The Independent
|title=Arundhati Roy furious at dam decision
|author=PETER POPHAM
|date=22 October 2000
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
Bhushan defended novellist ] when she was charged with contempt of court for publicly criticising judges in the dam hearings.
In March 2002 she was sentenced to one day in jail. According to Bhushan the judges were "just affronted by the fact that somebody has dared to criticise them".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/110224990.html?dids=110224990:110224990&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Mar+07%2C+2002&author=Vanessa+Gezari%2C+Special+to+the+Tribune&pub=Chicago+Tribune&desc=Top+court+jails+defiant+activist+in+India+%3B+Acclaimed+novelist+fights+dam+project&pqatl=google
|title=Top court jails defiant activist in India; Acclaimed novelist fights dam project
|work=Chicago Tribune
|author=Vanessa Gezari
|date=7 March 2002
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
In April 2002 a constitutional bench ruled that the decisions of the Supreme Court could not be assailed,
but someone who felt they had suffered a gross miscarriage' of justice could move a "curative" petition. Bhushan described this ruling as retrograde – a step backward.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2002-04-10/india/27110998_1_constitution-bench-review-petition-curative-petition
|work=The Times of India
|title=SC orders cannot be assailed under Article 32
|date=10 April 2002
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


Bhushan argued the ]s case representing ], thereby successfully getting the scheme declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India.<ref>{{Cite web |title= Prashant Bhushan, Kapil Sibal, Nizam Pasha & others — key lawyers involved in electoral bonds case|date=19 March 2024 |url=https://theprint.in/judiciary/prashant-bhushan-kapil-sibal-nizam-pasha-others-key-lawyers-involved-in-electoral-bonds-case/2006508/}}</ref>
In 2003 Bhushan filed a petition against Akhand Pratap Singh, chief secretary of the ] state government, challenging a decision to extend his tenure.
The petition alleged that Singh had been voted "most corrupt officer" in 1997 by the UP IAS Officers Association. The state government had ignored requests to allow a ] (CBI) probe into graft charges.
In November 2003 the petition was refused.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2003-11-01/lucknow/27191020_1_akhand-pratap-singh-chief-secretary-extension
|work=Times of India
|title=CS gets extension, SC issues notice
|date=1 November 2003
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
In July 2005 Bhushan was a member of an independent panel investigating a possible scam involving a company that made a huge profit buying and reselling Mumbai Airport Centaur Hotel and the son in law of former prime minister ].<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=313141
|work=Outlook India
|title=Panel seeks CBI probe into Ranjan Bhattacharya's 'links' in Centaur deal
|date=27 July 2005
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
In September 2005 Bhushan represented Common Cause, a social organisation, seeking to reopen the petrol-pump scam case against ], a former minister of petroleum in the Union government.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.telegraphindia.com/1050906/asp/nation/story_5202900.asp
|work=The Telegraph
|title=Pump scam cloud on former minister
|date=6 September 2005
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


=== Naxalism ===
In February 2006, as counsel for Lok Sevak Sangh, Bhushan submitted to the Supreme Court that the MP Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) might not be constitutionally valid.
A TV channel had recently aired video of a sting in which it appeared that some MPs had taken bribes under the scheme. Bhushan said none of the normal controls were being applied, and the scheme was breeding corruption.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=355838
|title=MPLADS comes under judicial scrutiny
|date=16 February 2006
|work=Outlook India
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


Prashant Bhushan has criticised the use of violence against the ] in the tribal-dominated areas. He has alleged that the actual intention of the ] was to clear the tribal lands for mining operations and industrialisation. According to him, the rapid industrialization has led to "destructive development" in the tribal areas through pollution and displacement of people.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?265284 |title=Ending The Cycle of Violence |date=30 April 2010 |publisher=Outlook }}</ref>
Some other widely discussed cases in which he has appeared relate to the ], disposal of the ] after the ] bankruptcy, ], ] and ] Double Taxation.
He appeared in a controversial case in which candidates for election to public office were required to disclose their assets and any criminal convictions.<ref name=Unilawonline/>


After the ], which led to the death of 76 policemen, he stated that such "retaliation" was expected because the government had declared the anti-Naxal operations as a war. He stated that to de-escalate the situation, the government should suspend the armed operations against the Naxals, and instead focus on providing food and infrastructure to the tribals.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/naxal-attack-rights-group-criticises-government-19540 |title=Naxal attack: Rights group criticises government |date=9 April 2010 |publisher=NDTV }}</ref>
==Controversy and criticism==


In April 2012 Bhushan drew criticism from Congress leaders when he refused to act as a mediator in negotiating with Maoists who were holding a District Collector hostage. He appealed to the Maoists to release the Govt. officer without conditions. He also said that the government should investigate and address legitimate demands.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/2012/4/24/30-Renuka-Chaudhary-slams-Prashant-Bhushan-for-refusing-to-mediate-for-releasing-abducted-collector.html |title=Renuka Chaudhary slams Prashant Bhushan for refusing to mediate for releasing abducted collector |date=24 April 2012 |publisher=News Track India |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Bhushan has often been involved in controversy.
He has been criticised by a variety of people including members of both the ] and the ] (BJP).


=== Death penalty ===
===Judicial corruption allegations===
Bhushan is against death penalty, and spoke against the hanging of ], who was the lone captured terrorist in the ].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://indianexpress.com/article/news-archive/web/prashant-differs-with-anna-on-kasab-death-penalty/ |title=Prashant differs with Anna on Kasab death penalty |date=13 September 2011 |newspaper=The Indian Express }}</ref> Along with Nitya Ramakrishnan, he was the counsel for the banned documentary 13 December, which is a reconstruction of the events that led to the attacks on Parliament, based on the chargesheet filed by the special police cell.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.telegraphindia.com/1021214/asp/nation/story_1479887.asp |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130205025029/http://www.telegraphindia.com/1021214/asp/nation/story_1479887.asp |url-status=dead |archive-date=5 February 2013 |publisher=The Telegraph |title=December 13 beamed after court nod |date=14 December 2002 |access-date=29 April 2012}}</ref>
Prashant Bhushan mounted a persistent campaign against judicial immunity, and this influenced the decision in September 2009 that judges would declare their assets.
Not long after, Bhushan asserted in an interview published by '']'' that "half of the last 16 Chief Justices have been corrupt". A lawyer filed a charge of contempt of court against Bhushan and the editor of the magazine.
In October 2010 Prashant Bhushan and his father Shanti Bhushan both filed formal affidavits alleging that eight retired chief justices were corrupt.
They noted the difficulty of getting documentary evidence because judges are immune from investigation.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main47.asp?filename=Ne021010Chief_Injustices.asp
|title=Chief Injustices – Excerpts from a milestone affidavit –
|work=Tehelka |date=2 October 2010
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
Justice ], a former supreme court judge, said that either Shanti Bhushan and Prashant Bhushan should be punished for making "false charges" or
an independent authority should scrutinise their allegations.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.dawn.com/2010/10/22/judiciary-on-trial-by-kuldip-nayar.html
|title=Judiciary on Trial |author=Kuldip Nayar |work=Dawn, Pakistan |accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>


===Kashmir plebiscite remarks=== === Other issues ===


In 1990, he successfully got the criminal liability aspect in the Bhopal gas tragedy reopened by SC, by challenging the settlement in the case of compensation to the victims. This reopened the case against the former Chairman of Union Carbide Corporation Warren Anderson (now deceased).<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/>
On 26 September 2011 Bhushan was asked for his opinion on ] at a press conference in ]. He said: "It is my personal opinion that no country or part of its territory can be governed without the wishes of the people with the help of army...I want that the situation be normalised, Army be withdrawn, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act be also withdrawn and then try to persuade the people of Kashmir to stay with India. And yet, if the people want, then there could be a plebiscite, and if the people of the Valley want separation, they be allowed to separate".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/India/Prashant-Bhushan-Had-Called-For-Plebiscite-In-Kashmir-11359.html
|title=Prashant Bhushan Had Called For Plebiscite In Kashmir
|date=12 October 2011
|work=India TV
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


Bhushan assisted the ] activists opposed to the ].<ref name=Unilawonline/> After six years of hearings, in October 2000 the Supreme Court ruled to allow the massive project to recommence. Bhushan criticised the decision for having been made "without any evidence of the facts before the judges".<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/arundhati-roy-furious-at-dam-decision-634956.html |work=The Independent |location=London |title=Arundhati Roy furious at dam decision |first=Peter |last=Popham |date=22 October 2000 |access-date=29 April 2012}}</ref> In February 2001 a criminal petition was filed with the Supreme Court of India accusing ], Prashant Bhushan and ] of contempt of court for having demonstrated in front of the Supreme Court in protest against the judgement on the ] dam.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/powerpolitics00roya |url-access=registration |page= |title=Power Politics |first=Arundhati |last=Roy |publisher=South End Press |year=2001 |isbn=0-89608-668-2}}</ref> Bhushan defended Arundhati Roy when she was charged with contempt of court for publicly criticising judges in the dam hearings. In March 2002 she was sentenced to one day in jail. According to Bhushan the judges were "just affronted by the fact that somebody has dared to criticise them".<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/2002/03/07/top-court-jails-defiant-activist-in-india/ |title=Top court jails defiant activist in India; Acclaimed novelist fights dam project |publisher=Chicago Tribune |location=Chicago |first=Vanessa |last=Gezari |date=7 March 2002 |access-date=29 April 2012}}</ref>
On 12 October 2011, Bhushan was attacked and beaten up because of this statement.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_revealed-the-sick-bunch-that-attacked-prashant-bhushan_1597962
|title=Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena, the sick bunch that 'attacked' Prashant Bhushan
|date=12 October 2011
|work=DNA India
|accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref>
The incident happened while a '']'' news channel team was interviewing Bhushan.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2531464.ece
|work=The Hindu
|date= 12 October 2011
|title=Goons attack Prashant Bhushan in chamber
|author=DEVESH K. PANDEY
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
Three youths entered his chamber in the Supreme Court, dragged him from his chair, slapped and punched him.
Two escaped. The third claimed to belong to an organisation called "Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.ibtl.in/news/national/1447/prashant-bhushan-beaten-up-inside-his-chamber
|work=IBTL
|title=Prashant Bhushan beaten up inside his chamber
|date=12 October 2011
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
He said: "We will break the heads of those who will try to break India".
The incident was captured by the television crew.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/India/Prashant-Bhushan-Beaten-Up-Inside-SC-Chamber-Over-Kashmir-Remark-11358.html
|title=Prashant Bhushan Beaten Up Inside SC Chamber Over Kashmir Remark
|date=12 October 2011
|work=India TV News
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>


Bhushan is ] to the ].<ref name="Tehelka_House_2008"/> He is opposed to ] and supported the ] against establishment of the ].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-12-29/india/45674389_1_kudankulam-nuclear-power-project-aap-movement-against-nuclear-energy |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140101030325/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-12-29/india/45674389_1_kudankulam-nuclear-power-project-aap-movement-against-nuclear-energy |url-status=dead |archive-date=1 January 2014 |newspaper=] |title=Prashant Bhushan assures AAP's support to agitation against Kudankulam nuclear plant |date=29 December 2013 }}</ref>
Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena claimed responsibility for the attack.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://ibnlive.in.com/news/prashant-bhushan-beaten-up-inside-his-chamber/192453-3.html
|work=IBN Live
|date=12 October 2011
|title=Three attack Prashant Bhushan for Kashmir remarks
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
Six hours before the attack, the group had posted on ]: "God give us power to complete our mission."<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.firstpost.com/politics/prashant-bhushan-attacked-in-sc-chambers-106036.html
|work=First Post
|title=Prashant Bhushan attacked in SC Chambers
|date=12 October 2011
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
In a Facebook post afterwards they wrote "we hit prashant bhushan hard in his chamber in supreme court.if u will try to break my nation,i will break ur heads."{{sic}}<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://news.oneindia.in/2011/10/12/prashant-bhushan-beaten-up-attackers-justify-brutal-act.html
|work=One India News
|title=Prashant Bhushan beaten up; attackers justify 'brutal' act
|date=12 October 2011
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
], the Home Minister, condemned the attack.
He dispatched a representative to the hospital where Bhushan had been taken for a check-up.
], General Secretary of ], said one of the attackers was a BJP youth worker,
a charge that was immediately denied by the BJP.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/activist-lawyer-prashant-bhushan-attacked-140624
|work=NDTV
|title=Activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan attacked at his chambers in Supreme Court
|date=13 October 2011
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
Bhushan described the activists as having a "fascist mindset" and stood by his statements.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bhushan-stands-by-his-kashmir-plebiscite-remark/192758-3.html
|date=13 October 2011
|title=My views on Kashmir not seditious, says Bhushan
|author=Rajdeep Sardesai
|publisher=CNN-IBN
|accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref>


In August 2015, Bhushan filed a PIL in the Supreme Court against the alleged corruption and nepotism in the selection of lower court judges in the Delhi Judicial Services Examination conducted in October 2014. As a result of the PIL, the Supreme Court ordered that the papers be checked by P. V. Reddi, a former SC judge and former Law Commission Chairman Justice. He subsequently recommended that 12 more judges should be inducted into the services. The Supreme Court has to issue guidelines for long-term systemic reform such as increasing transparency in the recruitment procedures.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.livelaw.in/prevent-allegations-favoritism-judicial-exams-sc-asks-delhi-hc-reply-bhushans-suggestions/|title=How to prevent allegations of favoritism in judicial exams? SC asks Delhi HC to reply to Bhushan's suggestions|last=livelaw|date=2016-04-13|website=Live Law|language=en-US|access-date=2016-05-02}}</ref>
The ] called for Bhushan to be tried for his statements about Kashmir.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_register-case-against-bhushan-for-comment-on-kashmir-shiv-sena_1598373
|title=Register case against Bhushan for comment on Kashmir: Shiv Sena
|work=DNA
|date=13 October 2011
|accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref>
], the leader of ], said "I praised the people who attacked him. No mercy should be shown to the people who advocate the division of the country".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/thackerays-defend-attack-on-prashant-bhushan/861413/
|work=The Indian Express
|title=Thackerays defend attack on Prashant Bhushan
|date=18 October 2011
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
It was reported on 19 October 2011 that a court in Varanasi had accepted a complaint against Prashant Bhushan requesting a treason case.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-10-19/varanasi/30297095_1_prashant-bhushan-treason-case-complaint
|work=Times of India
|title=Court accepts complaint against Prashant Bhushan
|date=19 October 2011
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
Anna Hazare said "Bhushan's statement (on Kashmir) is not the views of the team. He has never asked the team. These are his personal views".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-10-14/india/30278775_1_jammu-and-kashmir-team-anna-ralegan-siddhi
|title=Team Anna distances itself from Prashant Bhushan's comments on Kashmir
|date=14 October 2011
|work=The Times of India
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Hazare said "Our core committee will meet to decide on his continuing as a team member. After it meets. I will take a decision".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-10-16/news/30286248_1_ralegan-siddhi-prashant-bhushan-core-committee
|work=The Economic Times |location=India
|title=Rift in Team Anna Hazare on Prashant Bhushan, members dimayed at flip-flop
|date=16 October 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
In the event, Bhushan remained part of the team.<ref name=Express20120227/>
In April 2012 Bhushan said that while Team Anna supported ]'s initiative to subject party candidates for election to examinations, they did not support Thackeray's political views.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.samachar.com/Team-Anna-does-not-support-Rajs-politics-Prashant-Bhushan-me1sOvdjhah.html
|title='Team Anna doesn't support Raj Thackeray's politics'
|work=Hindustan Times
|date=27 April 2012
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>


The ] and the Government of India initiated contempt proceedings against advocate Bhushan for his tweets on 1 February 2019 in relation to the hearings before the Supreme Court of India in the case involving appointment of CBI chief.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2019-02-18|title=Contempt Petition against Prashant Bhushan for Rafale comments|url=http://onelawstreet.com/contempt-petition-against-prashant-bhushan-for-rafale-comments/|access-date=2019-02-20|website=1, Law Street|language=en-US}}</ref> Later, however, the Attorney General sought to withdraw the proceedings, indicating that the comments had been a "genuine mistake" by Bhushan.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-08-21|title=AG Venugopal speaks up for Prashant Bhushan, sought action over his tweets last year|url=https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ag-k-k-venugopal-prashant-bhushan-sought-action-over-his-tweets-last-year-6563512/|access-date=2020-08-24|website=The Indian Express|language=en}}</ref>
===Other controversy===


In August 2020, the Supreme Court of India held that Bhushan was guilty of ], in relation to two posts made by him on Twitter. The first post was a criticism of the role played by the previous four Chief Justices of India, and the second criticised the Chief Justice of India in relation to a photograph of him posing on a motorcycle without a mask while the Court was in lockdown during the ].<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|date=2020-08-16|title=SC holds Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt: What the verdict means|url=https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/prashant-bhushan-supreme-court-contempt-case-verdict-explained-6555183/|access-date=2020-08-24|website=The Indian Express|language=en}}</ref> Justice Arun Mishra, writing for the bench, held that these tweets were not just personal opinions, and that they tended to "shake the public confidence in the institution of judiciary".<ref name=":0" /> The proceedings were criticised widely by multiple former judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, including Supreme Court Justices ],<ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-08-20|title=Constitution Bench must hear Prashant Bhushan contempt of court case: ex-SC judge Kurian Joseph|url=https://indianexpress.com/article/india/constitution-bench-must-hear-bhushan-case-ex-sc-judge-joseph-6561837/|access-date=2020-08-24|website=The Indian Express|language=en}}</ref> ], ], ], Gopala Gowda, ], ] and ].<ref>{{Cite web|last=Sinha|first=Bhadra|date=2020-07-30|title=7 former SC judges back lawyer Prashant Bhushan, support call to withdraw contempt notice|url=https://theprint.in/judiciary/7-former-sc-judges-back-lawyer-prashant-bhushan-support-call-to-withdraw-contempt-notice/470952/|access-date=2020-08-24|website=ThePrint|language=en-US}}</ref> Bhushan was also supported with statements published by senior advocates and civil servants.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Several Retired SC, HC Judges Express Solidarity With Prashant Bhushan|url=https://thewire.in/law/retired-judges-statement-solidarity-prashant-bhushan|access-date=2020-08-24|website=The Wire}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Does not restore authority of court in public eye: 41 bar members on SC's Prashant Bhushan verdict|url=https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/india/does-not-restore-authority-of-court-in-public-eye-41-bar-members-on-scs-prashant-bhushan-verdict-5717451.html|access-date=2020-08-24|website=Moneycontrol|date=17 August 2020 }}</ref> During the proceedings, the Attorney General of India had objected to the Supreme Court, noting that contempt proceedings required his consent, which had not been obtained in this case. The Supreme Court declined to hear him and initially published an order that did not record his appearance, although it was later amended to correct this error.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-08-20|title=Prashant Bhushan case: Spotlight on AG's role after hearing|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/bhushan-case-spotlight-on-ag-s-role-after-hearing/story-KcQe0VtBKXxNgIPHBl1zPP.html|access-date=2020-08-24|website=Hindustan Times|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Correspondent|first=Legal|date=2020-08-21|title=Prashant Bhushan case {{!}} In 'revised' order, Supreme Court prominently features Attorney General's name|language=en-IN|work=The Hindu|url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/in-revised-order-in-prashant-bhushan-case-supreme-court-prominently-features-ags-name/article32415383.ece|access-date=2020-08-24|issn=0971-751X}}</ref> On 31 August 2020, the Supreme Court fined him {{INR}}1 for ], which he paid the same day.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Team|first=BS Web|title=LIVE: My tweets were not intended to disrespect SC, says Prashant Bhushan|url=https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/latest-news-today-live-updates-31-august-2020-120083100092_1.html|access-date=2020-08-31|website=www.business-standard.com|date=31 August 2020 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-08-31|title='I gratefully accept Supreme Court verdict', says Prashant Bhushan|url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/i-gratefully-accept-supreme-court-verdict-says-prashant-bhushan-adds-re-1-fine-paid/story-KQLwwp8XnNLY7knUfzaSMK.html|access-date=2020-08-31|website=Hindustan Times|language=en}}</ref>
In February 2001 a criminal petition was filed with the Supreme Court of India accusing ], Prashant Bhushan and ] of contempt of court for having demonstrated in front of the Supreme court in protest against the judgement on the ].<ref>{{cite book
|url=http://books.google.ca/books?id=bCuknjr8ZyYC&pg=PA87 |page=87
|title=Power Politics
|author=Arundhati Roy
|publisher=South End Press |year=2001 |ISBN=0-89608-668-2}}</ref>
During an interview with a former police office, the anchorperson of the '']'' TV channel turned to the camera and said: "] and Prashant Bhushan, I hope you are watching this. We think you are disgusting".<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://books.google.ca/books?id=TDEEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA44 |page=44
|title=9 is Not 11 (And November isn't September)
|date=22 December 2008
|volume=48 |issue=51
|journal=Outlook India
|author=Arundhati Roy
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>


His ] tweets and criticism of ] has invited him heavy criticism from across the political spectrum in India.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Sharma|first=Unnati|date=2021-06-29|title=Prashant Bhushan says Covid vaccines unsafe, Twitter marks his tweets as 'misleading'|url=https://theprint.in/india/prashant-bhushans-tweets-on-covid-vaccines-efficacy-get-misleading-flag-on-twitter/686305/|access-date=2021-09-16|website=ThePrint|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Jain|first=Aaliyah|date=2021-06-28|title=Prashant Bhushan Is Asking People Not To Take Covid Vaccines, Netizens React|url=https://www.scoopwhoop.com/news/netizens-blasted-at-prashant-bhushan-for-calling-the-promotion-of-vaccination-irresponsible/|access-date=2021-09-16|website=www.scoopwhoop.com|language=English}}</ref>
On 2 February 2010 the BJP government of ] granted Prashant Bhushan's "Kumud Bhushan Educational Society" permission to buy {{convert|4.68|ha}}
of land in order to build an educational institution.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://zeenews.india.com/news/himachal-pradesh/dhumal-defends-land-transfer-to-bhushan-trust_760965.html
|work=Zee News
|title=Dhumal defends land transfer to Bhushan trust
|date=27 February 2012
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
The sale was controversial because only the state government can give permission for sale or change of status of tea garden land.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20111224/himachal.htm#5
|title=Prashant Bhushan’s society bought tea garden land
|publisher=Tribune News Service |work=The Tribune |location=India
|location=Dharamsala |date=23 December 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Union minister ] charged that the sale was illegal.
However, Chief Minister ] rejected these charges in February 2012, defending the grant of relaxations to the educational trust,
and countered that the Congress government had been giving land to Tibetans that belonged to Himachal Pradesh.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/land-transferred-to-bhushans-trust-admits/916075/
|title=Land transferred to Bhushan’s trust, admits Dhumal, reminds Virbhadra of Tibetans
|work=The Indian Express
|location=Chandigarh |date=24 February 2012
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Bhushan had put up two buildings on the site and was using them to run workshops on policy awareness. He said that the plantation was in disuse and most of the bushes had died, but he had planted new bushes.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?280548
|work=Outlook India
|title=We Are The Higher-Ups
|author=CHANDER SUTA DOGRA
|date=23 April 2012
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


]
The ] criticised Anna Hazare's nomination of the Bhushans to the Lokpal committee.<ref name=Express20110411/>
Guru ] also criticised inclusion of both father and son, calling it nepotism.
Hazare defended the choice on the basis of the experience and ability of the two Bhushans.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_cracks-in-civil-society-over-inclusion-of-father-son-duo_1530203
|title=Cracks in civil society over inclusion of father-son duo
|date=9 April 2011
|work=DNA
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Soon after the committee began work, a CD was released that appeared to be a recording of conversation between Bhushan's father and ] of the ] related to the 2G case that was being heard at the time. If genuine, the CD would discredit Shanti Bhushan. Prashant Bhushan stated that labs had shown the CD was doctored. He and Anna Hazare said its purpose seemed to be to stop or delay both the 2G hearings and the Lokpal committee.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/18/stories/2011041858600800.htm
|title=CD is doctored: Prashant Bhushan
|work=The Hindu
|author=Gargi Parsai
|date= 18 April 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
Later Singh claimed in a press conference that Bhushan telephoned him and tried to stop him from talking.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article1994353.ece
|date=6 May 2011
|title=Prashant denies telephoning Amar Singh to ‘gag' him
|work=The Hindu
|author=GARGI PARSAI
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>


== Team Anna and Jan Lokpal movement ==
On 15 April 2011 Congress leader ] alleged that the two Bhushans had failed to pay taxes due when they bought an investment property in Allahabad.
Bhushan denied the charge, calling it a "very organised and concerted attempt to smear members of the civil society in the drafting committee with allegations".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.sify.com/news/prashant-bhushan-refutes-digvijay-singh-s-stamp-duty-evasion-charge-news-national-lepvEghhbhe.html
|work=Sify News
|title=Prashant Bhushan refutes Digvijay Singh's stamp duty evasion charge
|date=15 April 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
On 9 January 2012 it was reported that Shanti Bhushan had been found guilty of evading stamp duty on the home he had bought in Allahabad. The Assistant of Stamp Duty in Allahabad said the property, which Shanti Bhushan had bought in 1965, had been grossly undervalued, as had the related taxes. Revised stamp duty, interest on arrears and a fine would be levied.
Shanti Bhushan said ""This order of the Stamp Collector is totally illegal and contrary to the law ... This order has been clearly made under political pressure".<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/team-annas-shanti-bhushan-found-guilty-of-evading-1-3-crores-of-property-taxes-164319
|work=NDTV
|title=Team Anna's Shanti Bhushan found guilty of evading 1.3 crores of property taxes
|author=Anant Zanane
|date=9 January 2012
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


In 2010, there were a series of anti-corruption demonstrations in India, after high-profile cases like ] and ] were highlighted in the media. An anti-corruption crusade which included a demand for a Jan Lokpal Bill took place and became known as the ] movement.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/india-against-corruption-wants-pictures-of-other-freedom-fighters-on-currency-notes/articleshow/46830469.cms |title=India Against Corruption wants pictures of other freedom fighters on currency notes |publisher=Economic Times of India}}</ref> Prashant Bhushan was one of the several activists who participated in the anti-corruption crusade.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-01-28/delhi/28361639_1_lokpal-bill-corruption-kiran-bedi |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130103120240/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-01-28/delhi/28361639_1_lokpal-bill-corruption-kiran-bedi |url-status=dead |archive-date=3 January 2013 |title=Activists to march against corruption |date=28 January 2011 |work=] |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref>
In September 2011 Bhushan, ] and ] were being threatened with charges of breach of privilege for making derogatory remarks about MPs.
Bhushan urged MPs to not be so sensitive to criticism, saying the law of defamation gave them enough protection. Attempts to use their privileges to suppress free speech and crticism would backfire by making people feel there was a serious problem in the way that parliament was functioning.<ref>{{cite journal
|url=http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=734553
|journal=Outlook
|title=Do Not be Sensitive to Criticism: Bhushan to MPs
|date=13 September 2011
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>


In March, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) invited Hazare, the most prominent leader of the movement, for talks. Prashant Bhushan and his father Shanti Bhushan, along with ] and ], accompanied Hazare to the meeting.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sify.com/news/activists-to-meet-pm-on-lokpal-bill-news-national-ldgw4gafgbe.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110309045912/http://www.sify.com/news/activists-to-meet-pm-on-lokpal-bill-news-national-ldgw4gafgbe.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=9 March 2011 |title=Activists to meet PM on Lokpal Bill |website=Sify News |date=6 March 2011 |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref> Subsequently, in April 2011, Hazare nominated the Bhushans as members of the joint committee constituted to draft a final version of the Lokpal Bill.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_cracks-in-civil-society-over-inclusion-of-father-son-duo_1530203 |title=Cracks in civil society over inclusion of father-son duo |date=9 April 2011 |newspaper=DNA }}</ref>
In February 2012 Bhushan surprised commentators by coming out in favour of the government's proposed National Counter Terrorism Council.<ref name=Express20120227/>
In April 2012 Bhushan drew criticism from Congress leaders when he refused to act as a mediator in negotiating with Maoists who were holding a District Collector hostage.
He called for the Maoists to release the officer without conditions.
He also said that the government should investigate and address legitimate demands.<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/2012/4/24/30-Renuka-Chaudhary-slams-Prashant-Bhushan-for-refusing-to-mediate-for-releasing-abducted-collector.html
|title=Renuka Chaudhary slams Prashant Bhushan for refusing to mediate for releasing abducted collector
|date=24 April 2012
|work=News Track India
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>


A few days after the committee began work, a CD was released that appeared to be a recording of conversation between Shanti Bhushan and ] of the ]. The recording, related to ], would discredit Shanti Bhushan, if found to be genuine. Prashant Bhushan stated that labs had shown the CD was doctored, and that its purpose was to obstruct the anti-corruption movement.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/18/stories/2011041858600800.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110423045548/http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/18/stories/2011041858600800.htm |url-status=dead |archive-date=23 April 2011 |title=CD is doctored: Prashant Bhushan |first=Gargi |last=Parsai |date=18 April 2011 |work=] |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref> Later, Singh claimed that Bhushan telephoned him and tried to stop him from talking, a charge which Bhushan denied.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/prashant-denies-telephoning-amar-singh-to-gag-him/article1994353.ece |date=6 May 2011 |title=Prashant denies telephoning Amar Singh to 'gag' him |work=The Hindu |first=Gargi |last=Parsai |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref>
==Bibliography==
*{{cite book
|title=The case that shook India
|author=Prashant Bhushan
|publisher=Vikas Pub. House |year=1978
|ISBN=0-7069-0594-6
|pages=294}}
*{{cite book
|title=Bofors, the selling of a nation
|author=Prashant Bhushan
|publisher=Vision Books |year=1990
|ISBN=81-7094-066-4 |pages=275}}


The committee met the government representatives several times to discuss the proposed bill. Prashant Bhushan stated that the Lokpal should have full autonomy and power to prosecute all public servants, and that this principle was non-negotiable.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sify.com/news/basic-principles-of-lokpal-bill-not-negotiable-says-prashant-bhushan-news-national-lfxwanjfcbc.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150912114317/http://www.sify.com/news/basic-principles-of-lokpal-bill-not-negotiable-says-prashant-bhushan-news-national-lfxwanjfcbc.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=12 September 2015 |website=Sify News |title=Basic principles of Lokpal Bill not negotiable, says Prashant Bhushan |date=23 May 2011 |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref> Team Anna activists disagreed with the government's attempt to keep the Prime Minister out of the Lokpal's purview. The government did not want the Lokpal to have the power to investigate the Prime Minister, the higher judiciary, the defence services, the ] and the CVC and the conduct of MPs inside Parliament.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2063347.ece |date=31 May 2011 |title=Government going back on its word: Kejriwal |work=The Hindu |first=K. |last=Balchand |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref> The government's draft of the bill also excluded several other Lokpal powers proposed by Team Anna's draft such as the powers to tap phones.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2125762.ece |work=The Hindu |date=22 June 2011 |title=Lokpal: key proposals made by Hazare team missing from govt. draft |access-date=29 April 2012}}</ref>
== References ==
{{reflist|colwidth=33em|refs=
<ref name=Express20110411>{{cite web
|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bjp-attacks-hazare-over-inclusion-of-bhu.../774688/
|work=The Indian Express
|title=BJP slams Anna over inclusion of Bhushan father-son in panel
|date=11 April 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
<ref name=Express20120227>{{cite web
|url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/prashant-bhushan/917349/
|title=Team Anna's Prashant Bhushan backs Congress on 'anti-terror law'
|work=The Indian Express
|date=27 February 2012
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
<ref name=Express20110808>{{cite web
|url=http://newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/article481267.ece
|title=Proposed Lokpal Bill shields corrupt: Bhushan
|publisher=Express News Service
|date=8 August 2011
|accessdate=28 April 2012}}</ref>
<ref name=Ntrackindia20110810>{{cite web
|url=http://www.newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/234778
|work=News Track India
|title=Govt. should withdraw its Lokpal Bill: Prashant Bhushan
|date=10 August 2011
|accessdate=29 April 2012}}</ref>
<ref name=Rautray20110304>{{cite web
|url=http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110304/jsp/nation/story_13665807.jsp
|work=The Telegraph
|title=Feather in cap for graft fighters
|author=SAMANWAYA RAUTRAY AND PHEROZE L. VINCENT
|date=4 March 2011
|accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref>
<ref name=Unilawonline>{{cite web
|url=http://www.unilawonline.com/Luminaries/legal_luminaries.aspx
|title=Legal Luminaires – Prashant Bhushan
|work=Unilawonline
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}</ref>
}}


On 4 August 2011, the government's version of the Lokpal bill was tabled in the ]. Prashant Bhushan and other IAC activists criticised the bill as weak, stating that it would provide protection to the corrupt officials.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sify.com/news/govt-should-withdraw-its-lokpal-bill-prashant-bhushan-news-national-likvulfgddg.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140323162729/http://www.sify.com/news/govt-should-withdraw-its-lokpal-bill-prashant-bhushan-news-national-likvulfgddg.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=23 March 2014 |title=Govt. should withdraw its Lokpal Bill: Prashant Bhushan |date=10 August 2011 |website=] }}</ref> Hazare staged a demonstration against the government's version of the bill, but was detained. The other activists, including Prashant Bhushan, then organised peaceful protests across the country.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-08-16/news/29892324_1_jai-prakash-narain-park-anna-hazare-protest-march |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140202170107/http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-08-16/news/29892324_1_jai-prakash-narain-park-anna-hazare-protest-march |url-status=dead |archive-date=2 February 2014 |publisher=The Economic Times |location=India |title=Cabinet ministers taking decisions on Hazare's protest: Prashant Bhushan |date=16 August 2011 |access-date=29 April 2012}}</ref> Following a hunger strike by Hazare and more failed negotiations with the government representatives, a section of Team Anna activists led by Kejriwal and Bhushan decided to enter politics to pass the bill themselves.
== External links ==
* {{cite web
|url=http://www.barandbench.com/brief/4/1066/conversation-with-prashant-bhushan
|title=Conversation with Prashant Bhushan
|work=Bar & Bench
|date=25 October 2010
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}
* {{cite journal
|url=http://www.frontline.in/fl2717/stories/20100827271703000.htm
|title=No one wants independent investigation
|author=V. VENKATESAN
|work=Frontline |volume=27 |issue=17 |date= 14–27 August 2010
|accessdate=27 April 2012}}
*{{cite web
|url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main42.asp?filename=Ne050909half_of.asp
|title=Half Of The Last 16 Chief Justices Were Corrupt
|author=SHOMA CHAUDHURY
|work=Tehelka |date=5 September 2009 |accessdate=27 April 2012}}
*{{cite web
|url=http://www.tehelka.com/story_main23.asp?filename=We_have_Prashant_Bhushan_SP.asp
|title=We have had many corrupt CJIs in the last 15 years
|author=Vikram Jit Singh
|work=Tehelka |date=24 November 2006 |accessdate=27 April 2012}}


=== Himachal land controversy ===
{{Persondata <!-- Metadata: see ]. -->

| NAME = Bhushan, Prashant
In 2011, the Congress leader ] alleged that the two Bhushans had failed to pay taxes due when they bought an investment property in Allahabad. Bhushan denied the charge, calling it a "very organised and concerted attempt to smear members of the civil society in the Lokpal drafting committee with allegations".<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sify.com/news/prashant-bhushan-refutes-digvijay-singh-s-stamp-duty-evasion-charge-news-national-lepvEghhbhe.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140315042046/http://www.sify.com/news/prashant-bhushan-refutes-digvijay-singh-s-stamp-duty-evasion-charge-news-national-lepvEghhbhe.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=15 March 2014 |website=Sify News |title=Prashant Bhushan refutes Digvijay Singh's stamp duty evasion charge |date=15 April 2011 |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref>
| ALTERNATIVE NAMES =

| SHORT DESCRIPTION =
In a similar accusation, the former BJP Chief Minister, ], had rejected those charges, defending the grant of relaxations to the educational trust.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.indianexpress.com/news/land-transferred-to-bhushans-trust-admits/916075/ |title=Land transferred to Bhushan's trust, admits Dhumal, reminds Virbhadra of Tibetans |publisher=The Indian Express |location=Chandigarh |date=24 February 2012 |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref>
| DATE OF BIRTH = 1956

| PLACE OF BIRTH =
=== Kashmir issue controversy ===
| DATE OF DEATH =

| PLACE OF DEATH =
In 2011, at a press conference in ], Bhushan stated that he wanted the ] to be revoked in ]. He added that the government should try to persuade the people of the Kashmir valley to align with India but that they should be allowed to separate if they wish to do so.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/India/Prashant-Bhushan-Had-Called-For-Plebiscite-In-Kashmir-11359.html |title=Prashant Bhushan Had Called For Plebiscite in Kashmir |date=12 October 2011 |publisher=India TV |access-date=29 April 2012}}</ref> On 12 October 2011, he was attacked by the members of Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena inside the Supreme Court complex, for these remarks. The group accused him of trying to break up India. He was dragged out of his chair, and repeatedly kicked and punched.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013">{{cite news |url=http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/prashat-bhushan-coal-scam-2g-radia-tapes/1/321465.html |title=PIL warrior Prashat Bhushan: Scams, isolation and his beliefs |first=Harish V. |last=Nair |date=3 November 2013 |publisher=Mail Today }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.oneindia.in/2011/10/12/prashant-bhushan-beaten-up-attackers-justify-brutal-act.html |publisher=One India News |title=Prashant Bhushan beaten up; attackers justify 'brutal' act |date=12 October 2011 |access-date=27 April 2012}}</ref> Bhushan described his attackers as having a "fascist mindset" and stood by his statements.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bhushan-stands-by-his-kashmir-plebiscite-remark/192758-3.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111014101458/http://ibnlive.in.com/news/bhushan-stands-by-his-kashmir-plebiscite-remark/192758-3.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=14 October 2011 |date=13 October 2011 |title=My views on Kashmir not seditious, says Bhushan |first=Rajdeep |last=Sardesai |publisher=CNN-IBN |access-date=26 April 2012}}</ref> Several politicians and activists condemned the attack on Bhushan, while some others criticised him. The ] called for a police case to be registered against Bhushan, accusing him of supporting the anti-national elements.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_register-case-against-bhushan-for-comment-on-kashmir-shiv-sena_1598373 |title=Register case against Bhushan for comment on Kashmir: Shiv Sena |publisher=DNA |date=13 October 2011 |access-date=26 April 2012}}</ref> Hazare distanced Team Anna from Bhushan's remarks, saying that these were his personal views.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Team-Anna-distances-itself-from-Prashant-Bhushans-comments-on-Kashmir/articleshow/10351687.cms |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131210231510/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-10-14/india/30278775_1_jammu-and-kashmir-team-anna-ralegan-siddhi |url-status=live |archive-date=10 December 2013 |title=Team Anna distances itself from Prashant Bhushan's comments on Kashmir |date=14 October 2011 |work=] |access-date=28 April 2012}}</ref>
}}

== Political views ==

Bhushan had long been a critic of the ] (UPA) government. In 2012, he co-founded the ], stating that the other political parties were corrupt.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/>

Bhushan accused ]'s Prime Ministerial candidate ] of being corrupt and a "puppet" of ].<ref>{{cite news |url= http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-01-09/news/46030315_1_prashant-bhushan-narendra-modi-bjp-mla|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20140110064325/http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-01-09/news/46030315_1_prashant-bhushan-narendra-modi-bjp-mla|url-status= dead|archive-date= 10 January 2014|publisher=The Economic Times |location=India |title=Prashant Bhushan takes on Narendra Modi, calls him a Reliance puppet|date=9 January 2014}}</ref> He also accused ] of supporting terror activities, and criticised BJP for its association with the RSS.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-02-08/news/47148820_1_rss-prashant-bhushan-sister-organisations |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140222161115/http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-02-08/news/47148820_1_rss-prashant-bhushan-sister-organisations |url-status=dead |archive-date=22 February 2014 |publisher=The Economic Times |location=India |title=Will BJP snap its ties with RSS, asks AAP's Prashant Bhushan|date=8 February 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-will-bjp-snap-its-ties-with-rss-asks-prashant-bhushan-1960355|work=Daily News and Analysis |location=India |title=Will BJP snap its ties with RSS, asks Prashant Bhushan|date=8 February 2014}}</ref>

Before the ], Bhushan accused party's chief Arvind Kejriwal of selecting candidates of his own choice.<ref></ref> After the elections, on 4 March 2015, Bhushan and ] were voted out of Political Affairs Committee of Aam Aadmi Party for alleged anti-party activities and for working toward the party's defeat in the Delhi elections. Both Bhushan and Yadav denied the charges. On 28 March 2015, they were dropped from the National Executive Council of the AAP following a vote, at a meeting the conduct of which was afterwards disputed by Bhushan. He and Yadav then formed a new political movement called Swaraj Abhiyan.<ref></ref> In April 2015, they were expelled from the party by AAP's disciplinary committee.<ref></ref>

== Personal life ==

Prashant Bhushan is married to Deepa Bhushan, a former lawyer. The couple has three sons.<ref name="Outlook_warrior_2013"/>

== Bibliography ==
*{{cite book |title=The Case That Shook India |title-link=The Case That Shook India |first=Prashant |last=Bhushan |publisher=Vikas Pub. House |year=1978 |isbn=0-7069-0594-6 |pages=294}}
*{{cite book |title=Bofors, the selling of a nation |first=Prashant |last=Bhushan |publisher=Vision Books |year=1990 |isbn=81-7094-066-4 |pages=275}}

== References ==
{{Reflist}}


{{Corruption in India}} {{Authority control}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:Bhushan, Prashant}} {{DEFAULTSORT:Bhushan, Prashant}}
] ]
]
] ]
] ]
]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 03:00, 14 December 2024

Indian activist, lawyer and politician

Prashant Bhushan
Born (1956-10-15) 15 October 1956 (age 68)
Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
Alma materAllahabad University, Princeton University
OccupationAdvocate-on-Record
SpouseDeepa Bhushan
Children3

Prashant Bhushan (born 15 October 1956) is an Indian author and a public interest lawyer in the Supreme Court of India. He was a member of the faction of the India Against Corruption (IAC) movement known as Team Anna which supported Anna Hazare's campaign for the implementation of the Jan Lokpal Bill. After a split in IAC, he helped Team Anna form the Aam Aadmi Party. In 2015, he made several allegations against the party's leadership, its functioning and its deviation from the core ideology, values and commitments. He is one of the founders of Swaraj Abhiyan and Sambhaavnaa, an Institute of Public Policy and Politics.

Early life & education

Prashant Bhushan is the oldest of the three children of Shanti Bhushan and Kumud Bhushan. His father is a lawyer-activist and a former Union Law Minister in the Morarji Desai government.

Bhushan was educated at St. Joseph's High School, Prayagraj, and at the St Joseph's College, Allahabad. Bhushan, who dropped out of IIT Madras after first semester and briefly attended Princeton University has a degree in law from Allahabad University. While still a student, Bhushan wrote The Case That Shook India, a book on the case that set aside Indira Gandhi's election in 1974. Bhushan has a B.A and L.L.B degree from Allahabad University. He dropped out of Princeton University's Ph.D program, but obtained an M.A in philosophy of science.

Legal activism

Bhushan was drawn to public activism, influenced by his father. His main areas of interest have been human rights, environmental protection and accountability of the public servants. He is associated with various organisations including the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), and Transparency International (India). He is also the convenor of the Working Committee of the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms.

Bhushan states that he has taken up about 500 cases dealing with "good causes". His family background allowed him to work on a pro-bono basis for such cases: according to him, he effectively spends only 25 per cent of his time on paid cases, charging 5 per cent of what other lawyers charge. He has criticised the other professional lawyers as "amoral", and claims that he never takes up a case unless he feels that his client is "morally right".

Judicial accountability

Bhushan says that he envisages a transparent and honest legal system, where people can negotiate their own cases without the need of any lawyers. In 1990, he and his father formed the Committee on Judicial Accountability (CJA) to fight corruption in the judiciary. The organisation comprised some lawyers and ex-judges. Prashant Bhushan started focusing more on this issue in 1993, after the Supreme Court Justice V. Ramaswami was not impeached by parliament on corruption charges. In 2007, the Bhushans expanded CJA to include citizens and form the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reform (CJAR).

In 2009, Prashant Bhushan represented activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal, asking for the Supreme Court and High Court judges to be brought under RTI. The judges were forced to declare their assets and post it on the court websites.

In a 2009 interview, Bhushan alleged that at least half of the 16 former Chief Justices in the Supreme Court were corrupt. Harish Salve filed a contempt case against him in 2010, and the Supreme Court asked Bhushan to apologise. In response, Bhushan submitted an explanation stating why he felt those judges were corrupt. The Bhushans noted the difficulty of getting documentary evidence because judges are immune from investigation. Krishna Iyer, a former Supreme Court judge, said that either the Bhushans should be punished for making "false charges" or an independent authority should be set up to scrutinise their allegations.

Bhushan has recommended amendment to the Contempt of Court Act clause, stating that some of its clauses effectively prevent the press from exposing the corruption in the judiciary. He has also opposed the rule which prevents people from registering a First Information Report against a judge without the permission of the Chief Justice of India.

Government accountability

In 1990, Bhushan wrote a book Bofors, the selling of a nation (1990) on the Bofors scandal.

CPIL won a major victory in 2003 when the Supreme Court restrained the Union government from privatising Hindustan Petroleum and Bharat Petroleum without the approval of Parliament. As counsel for the CPIL, Rajinder Sachar and Bhushan argued that the only way to disinvest in the companies would be to repeal or amend the Acts by which they were nationalised in the 1970s.

Bhushan represented the CPIL in a petition asking for the removal of Neera Yadav from office as Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh for alleged corruption. Yadav had been named in five CBI corruption cases and 23 departmental proceedings. In October 2005 the Supreme Court directed the Mulayam Singh state government to remove her from her position. The case became the first in which an Indian Administrative Service officer in Uttar Pradesh was convicted of corruption.

In February 2006, as counsel for Lok Sevak Sangh, Bhushan submitted to the Supreme Court that the MP Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) might not be constitutionally valid. A TV channel had recently aired video of a sting in which it appeared that some MPs had taken bribes under the scheme. Bhushan said none of the normal controls were being applied, and the scheme was breeding corruption. The same year, Bhushan also represented the CPIL in a petition alleging that PepsiCo and Coca-Cola were failing to warn the public of harmful ingredients in their beverages, and were luring young children through misleading advertising.

Bhushan filed a PIL challenging the appointment of P.J. Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner, after Thomas had been charged in the Palmolein Oil Import Scam. In March 2011, SC struck down the appointment.

Prashant Bhushan acted for the CPIL when it took the lead in filing a suit against the Government of India for irregularities in a major award of spectrum for 2G mobile telephones. The CPIL petition alleged that the government had lost $15.53 billion by issuing spectrum in 2008 based on 2001 prices, and by not following a competitive bidding process. The Supreme Court asked the CBI to probe the irregularities in the auction of 2G spectrum. The inquiry resulted in the resignation of the telecom minister A. Raja, who was later arrested along with others including the DMK MP Kanimozhi, officials of Unitech wireless and officials of Reliance ADAG. In September 2011 Bhushan presented evidence that appeared to disprove the claim by the CBI that Dayanidhi Maran, the former telecom minister, had not applied undue pressure to the owner of Aircel to sell to the Maxis group of Malaysia. Bhushan said the CBI's investigation had been "less than honest". In January 2012 Bhushan questioned why the CBI had failed to lay charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act against companies such as Essar Group and Loop Mobile despite strong evidence against them. In February 2012 the Supreme Court declared the allocation of spectrum had been illegal.

In 2012, Bhushan filed a PIL seeking cancelation of coal block allocations by the government on the grounds that certain companies had been illegally favoured by the politicians. In response to the PIL, the Supreme Court (SC) scrutinised coal block allocation since 1993. Bhushan also filed a PIL against illegal iron ore extraction in Goa, which led to the Supreme Court halting all the mining operations in the state.

He successfully challenged the Prime Minister and Home Minister's decision to appoint PJ Thomas as the head of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). Acting on his PIL, SC directed the CVC to apprise it of actions taken on complaints by whistleblowers in the country.

Prashant Bhushan also represents whisteblower Anand Rai in the ongoing PIL regarding Vyapam scam in the Supreme Court.

Before K V Chowdary's appointment Prashant Bhushan raised a red flag, asking the Prime Minister not to go ahead with his appointment, raising severe objections on Chowdary's tenure as CBDT Chief. After Chowdary being appointed, NGO Common Cause represented by Prashant Bhushan has filed a petition in Supreme Court of India challenging K V Chowdary's appointment as CVC and T M Bhasin's appointment as VC on 22 July.

Bhushan argued the Electoral Bonds case representing Association for Democratic Reforms, thereby successfully getting the scheme declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India.

Naxalism

Prashant Bhushan has criticised the use of violence against the Naxal insurgents in the tribal-dominated areas. He has alleged that the actual intention of the Operation Green Hunt was to clear the tribal lands for mining operations and industrialisation. According to him, the rapid industrialization has led to "destructive development" in the tribal areas through pollution and displacement of people.

After the April 2010 Maoist attack in Dantewada, which led to the death of 76 policemen, he stated that such "retaliation" was expected because the government had declared the anti-Naxal operations as a war. He stated that to de-escalate the situation, the government should suspend the armed operations against the Naxals, and instead focus on providing food and infrastructure to the tribals.

In April 2012 Bhushan drew criticism from Congress leaders when he refused to act as a mediator in negotiating with Maoists who were holding a District Collector hostage. He appealed to the Maoists to release the Govt. officer without conditions. He also said that the government should investigate and address legitimate demands.

Death penalty

Bhushan is against death penalty, and spoke against the hanging of Ajmal Kasab, who was the lone captured terrorist in the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Along with Nitya Ramakrishnan, he was the counsel for the banned documentary 13 December, which is a reconstruction of the events that led to the attacks on Parliament, based on the chargesheet filed by the special police cell.

Other issues

In 1990, he successfully got the criminal liability aspect in the Bhopal gas tragedy reopened by SC, by challenging the settlement in the case of compensation to the victims. This reopened the case against the former Chairman of Union Carbide Corporation Warren Anderson (now deceased).

Bhushan assisted the Narmada Bachao Andolan activists opposed to the Sardar Sarovar Dam. After six years of hearings, in October 2000 the Supreme Court ruled to allow the massive project to recommence. Bhushan criticised the decision for having been made "without any evidence of the facts before the judges". In February 2001 a criminal petition was filed with the Supreme Court of India accusing Medha Patkar, Prashant Bhushan and Arundhati Roy of contempt of court for having demonstrated in front of the Supreme Court in protest against the judgement on the Sardar Sarovar dam. Bhushan defended Arundhati Roy when she was charged with contempt of court for publicly criticising judges in the dam hearings. In March 2002 she was sentenced to one day in jail. According to Bhushan the judges were "just affronted by the fact that somebody has dared to criticise them".

Bhushan is opposed to the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement. He is opposed to nuclear energy and supported the People's Movement Against Nuclear Energy against establishment of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant.

In August 2015, Bhushan filed a PIL in the Supreme Court against the alleged corruption and nepotism in the selection of lower court judges in the Delhi Judicial Services Examination conducted in October 2014. As a result of the PIL, the Supreme Court ordered that the papers be checked by P. V. Reddi, a former SC judge and former Law Commission Chairman Justice. He subsequently recommended that 12 more judges should be inducted into the services. The Supreme Court has to issue guidelines for long-term systemic reform such as increasing transparency in the recruitment procedures.

The Attorney General of India and the Government of India initiated contempt proceedings against advocate Bhushan for his tweets on 1 February 2019 in relation to the hearings before the Supreme Court of India in the case involving appointment of CBI chief. Later, however, the Attorney General sought to withdraw the proceedings, indicating that the comments had been a "genuine mistake" by Bhushan.

In August 2020, the Supreme Court of India held that Bhushan was guilty of contempt of court, in relation to two posts made by him on Twitter. The first post was a criticism of the role played by the previous four Chief Justices of India, and the second criticised the Chief Justice of India in relation to a photograph of him posing on a motorcycle without a mask while the Court was in lockdown during the Covid-19 pandemic in India. Justice Arun Mishra, writing for the bench, held that these tweets were not just personal opinions, and that they tended to "shake the public confidence in the institution of judiciary". The proceedings were criticised widely by multiple former judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, including Supreme Court Justices Kurian Joseph, Ruma Pal, G.S. Singhvi, A.K. Ganguly, Gopala Gowda, Aftab Alam, Jasti Chelameswar and Vikramjit Sen. Bhushan was also supported with statements published by senior advocates and civil servants. During the proceedings, the Attorney General of India had objected to the Supreme Court, noting that contempt proceedings required his consent, which had not been obtained in this case. The Supreme Court declined to hear him and initially published an order that did not record his appearance, although it was later amended to correct this error. On 31 August 2020, the Supreme Court fined him ₹1 for contempt of court, which he paid the same day.

His anti-vaccine tweets and criticism of mask mandates has invited him heavy criticism from across the political spectrum in India.

Prashant Bhushan on Fast

Team Anna and Jan Lokpal movement

In 2010, there were a series of anti-corruption demonstrations in India, after high-profile cases like Commonwealth Games scam and Adarsh scam were highlighted in the media. An anti-corruption crusade which included a demand for a Jan Lokpal Bill took place and became known as the India Against Corruption movement. Prashant Bhushan was one of the several activists who participated in the anti-corruption crusade.

In March, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) invited Hazare, the most prominent leader of the movement, for talks. Prashant Bhushan and his father Shanti Bhushan, along with Swami Agnivesh and Kiran Bedi, accompanied Hazare to the meeting. Subsequently, in April 2011, Hazare nominated the Bhushans as members of the joint committee constituted to draft a final version of the Lokpal Bill.

A few days after the committee began work, a CD was released that appeared to be a recording of conversation between Shanti Bhushan and Amar Singh of the Samajwadi Party. The recording, related to 2G spectrum case, would discredit Shanti Bhushan, if found to be genuine. Prashant Bhushan stated that labs had shown the CD was doctored, and that its purpose was to obstruct the anti-corruption movement. Later, Singh claimed that Bhushan telephoned him and tried to stop him from talking, a charge which Bhushan denied.

The committee met the government representatives several times to discuss the proposed bill. Prashant Bhushan stated that the Lokpal should have full autonomy and power to prosecute all public servants, and that this principle was non-negotiable. Team Anna activists disagreed with the government's attempt to keep the Prime Minister out of the Lokpal's purview. The government did not want the Lokpal to have the power to investigate the Prime Minister, the higher judiciary, the defence services, the CBI and the CVC and the conduct of MPs inside Parliament. The government's draft of the bill also excluded several other Lokpal powers proposed by Team Anna's draft such as the powers to tap phones.

On 4 August 2011, the government's version of the Lokpal bill was tabled in the Lok Sabha. Prashant Bhushan and other IAC activists criticised the bill as weak, stating that it would provide protection to the corrupt officials. Hazare staged a demonstration against the government's version of the bill, but was detained. The other activists, including Prashant Bhushan, then organised peaceful protests across the country. Following a hunger strike by Hazare and more failed negotiations with the government representatives, a section of Team Anna activists led by Kejriwal and Bhushan decided to enter politics to pass the bill themselves.

Himachal land controversy

In 2011, the Congress leader Digvijaya Singh alleged that the two Bhushans had failed to pay taxes due when they bought an investment property in Allahabad. Bhushan denied the charge, calling it a "very organised and concerted attempt to smear members of the civil society in the Lokpal drafting committee with allegations".

In a similar accusation, the former BJP Chief Minister, Prem Kumar Dhumal, had rejected those charges, defending the grant of relaxations to the educational trust.

Kashmir issue controversy

In 2011, at a press conference in Varanasi, Bhushan stated that he wanted the Armed Forces Special Powers Act to be revoked in Jammu and Kashmir. He added that the government should try to persuade the people of the Kashmir valley to align with India but that they should be allowed to separate if they wish to do so. On 12 October 2011, he was attacked by the members of Bhagat Singh Kranti Sena inside the Supreme Court complex, for these remarks. The group accused him of trying to break up India. He was dragged out of his chair, and repeatedly kicked and punched. Bhushan described his attackers as having a "fascist mindset" and stood by his statements. Several politicians and activists condemned the attack on Bhushan, while some others criticised him. The Shiv Sena called for a police case to be registered against Bhushan, accusing him of supporting the anti-national elements. Hazare distanced Team Anna from Bhushan's remarks, saying that these were his personal views.

Political views

Bhushan had long been a critic of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. In 2012, he co-founded the Aam Aadmi Party, stating that the other political parties were corrupt.

Bhushan accused BJP's Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi of being corrupt and a "puppet" of Reliance Industries. He also accused RSS of supporting terror activities, and criticised BJP for its association with the RSS.

Before the 2015 Delhi elections, Bhushan accused party's chief Arvind Kejriwal of selecting candidates of his own choice. After the elections, on 4 March 2015, Bhushan and Yogendra Yadav were voted out of Political Affairs Committee of Aam Aadmi Party for alleged anti-party activities and for working toward the party's defeat in the Delhi elections. Both Bhushan and Yadav denied the charges. On 28 March 2015, they were dropped from the National Executive Council of the AAP following a vote, at a meeting the conduct of which was afterwards disputed by Bhushan. He and Yadav then formed a new political movement called Swaraj Abhiyan. In April 2015, they were expelled from the party by AAP's disciplinary committee.

Personal life

Prashant Bhushan is married to Deepa Bhushan, a former lawyer. The couple has three sons.

Bibliography

References

  1. ^ Lall, Rashmi Roshan (10 April 2011). "Citizen Anna and agent Prashant". The Times of India. Archived from the original on 6 November 2011.
  2. ^ Sampath, G. (29 November 2020). "Prashant Bhushan interview | 'The independence of the judiciary has collapsed'". The Hindu.
  3. "Prashant Bhushan, AAP and the forbidden K-word". Hindustan Times. 8 January 2014.
  4. Sampath, G. (27 November 2020). "The independence of the judiciary has collapsed: Prashant Bhushan". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 16 January 2021.
  5. "Prashant Bhushan: The importance of being Prashant Bhushan - Times of India". The Times of India. Retrieved 16 January 2021.
  6. Sharma, Nagendar (19 December 2010). "The man who put Raja in the dock". Hindustan Times. Archived from the original on 11 January 2014.
  7. ^ Peri, Mahesh (6 January 2014). "Prashant Bhushan: "Engage in issues of public interest!"". Careers360.
  8. ^ "Legal Luminaires – Prashant Bhushan". Unilawonline. Archived from the original on 25 April 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  9. "Working Committee". Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reforms. Retrieved 30 April 2012.
  10. "Who Is Prashant Bhushan?".
  11. ^ Simha, Vijay (6 September 2008). "The House of Bhushan". Vol. 5, no. 35. Tehelka. Archived from the original on 5 January 2013. Retrieved 20 November 2010.
  12. ^ Nair, Harish V. (3 November 2013). "PIL warrior Prashat Bhushan: Scams, isolation and his beliefs". Mail Today.
  13. Bhushan, Prashant (9 December 2009). "My Honest And Bonafide Perception". Outlook. Retrieved 7 October 2013.
  14. "Chief Injustices – Excerpts from a milestone affidavit". Tehelka. 2 October 2010. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  15. Nayar, Kuldip. "Judiciary on Trial". Pakistan: Dawn. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  16. "Conversation with Prashant Bhushan". Bar & Bench. 25 October 2010. Archived from the original on 29 October 2010. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  17. Rautra, Samanwaya; Vincent, Pheroze L. (4 March 2011). "Feather in cap for graft fighters". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 5 January 2013. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
  18. Ramakrishna, G. V. (2004). Two Score and Ten: My Experiences in Government. Academic Foundation. p. 301. ISBN 81-7188-339-7.
  19. Bhatnagar, Rakesh (6 October 2005). "Mulayam honours SC verdict, Neera Yadav goes". DNA. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  20. "Those who make the grade". Tehelka. 11 May 2005. Archived from the original on 8 February 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  21. "MPLADS comes under judicial scrutiny". Outlook. 16 February 2006. Archived from the original on 29 April 2012. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  22. "Court to hear cola case after 6 weeks". The Times of India. 5 August 2006. Archived from the original on 3 January 2013. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  23. "ED tells SC that 2G spectrum scam probe is underway". India Telecom Monthly Newsletter. Information Gatekeepers Inc: 6. October 2010.
  24. "2G scam: NGO to counter CBI on Maran". The Times of India. 7 September 2011. Archived from the original on 3 January 2013. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  25. "2G scam: SC seeks CBI, ED response on charges they are soft". The Indian Express. 5 January 2012. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  26. "Dr. Subramanian Swamy ...Petitioner versus Union of India and others ...Respondents". Keralaw. 2 February 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
  27. "Prashanth Bhushan explains why KV Chowdhary shouldn't be CVC | Tehelka - Investigations, Latest News, Politics, Analysis, Blogs, Culture, Photos, Videos, Podcasts". www.tehelka.com. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 13 January 2022.
  28. "Prashant Bhushan on the new CVC appointment. Shocking Facts". Archived from the original on 30 July 2015. Retrieved 29 July 2015.
  29. "Petition in SC Challenging Appointment of CVC and VC". 24 February 2023.
  30. "Prashant Bhushan, Kapil Sibal, Nizam Pasha & others — key lawyers involved in electoral bonds case". 19 March 2024.
  31. "Ending The Cycle of Violence". Outlook. 30 April 2010.
  32. "Naxal attack: Rights group criticises government". NDTV. 9 April 2010.
  33. "Renuka Chaudhary slams Prashant Bhushan for refusing to mediate for releasing abducted collector". News Track India. 24 April 2012. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  34. "Prashant differs with Anna on Kasab death penalty". The Indian Express. 13 September 2011.
  35. "December 13 beamed after court nod". The Telegraph. 14 December 2002. Archived from the original on 5 February 2013. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  36. Popham, Peter (22 October 2000). "Arundhati Roy furious at dam decision". The Independent. London. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  37. Roy, Arundhati (2001). Power Politics. South End Press. p. 87. ISBN 0-89608-668-2.
  38. Gezari, Vanessa (7 March 2002). "Top court jails defiant activist in India; Acclaimed novelist fights dam project". Chicago: Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  39. "Prashant Bhushan assures AAP's support to agitation against Kudankulam nuclear plant". The Times of India. 29 December 2013. Archived from the original on 1 January 2014.
  40. livelaw (13 April 2016). "How to prevent allegations of favoritism in judicial exams? SC asks Delhi HC to reply to Bhushan's suggestions". Live Law. Retrieved 2 May 2016.
  41. "Contempt Petition against Prashant Bhushan for Rafale comments". 1, Law Street. 18 February 2019. Retrieved 20 February 2019.
  42. "AG Venugopal speaks up for Prashant Bhushan, sought action over his tweets last year". The Indian Express. 21 August 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
  43. ^ "SC holds Prashant Bhushan guilty of contempt: What the verdict means". The Indian Express. 16 August 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
  44. "Constitution Bench must hear Prashant Bhushan contempt of court case: ex-SC judge Kurian Joseph". The Indian Express. 20 August 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
  45. Sinha, Bhadra (30 July 2020). "7 former SC judges back lawyer Prashant Bhushan, support call to withdraw contempt notice". ThePrint. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
  46. "Several Retired SC, HC Judges Express Solidarity With Prashant Bhushan". The Wire. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
  47. "Does not restore authority of court in public eye: 41 bar members on SC's Prashant Bhushan verdict". Moneycontrol. 17 August 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
  48. "Prashant Bhushan case: Spotlight on AG's role after hearing". Hindustan Times. 20 August 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
  49. Correspondent, Legal (21 August 2020). "Prashant Bhushan case | In 'revised' order, Supreme Court prominently features Attorney General's name". The Hindu. ISSN 0971-751X. Retrieved 24 August 2020. {{cite news}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  50. Team, BS Web (31 August 2020). "LIVE: My tweets were not intended to disrespect SC, says Prashant Bhushan". www.business-standard.com. Retrieved 31 August 2020.
  51. "'I gratefully accept Supreme Court verdict', says Prashant Bhushan". Hindustan Times. 31 August 2020. Retrieved 31 August 2020.
  52. Sharma, Unnati (29 June 2021). "Prashant Bhushan says Covid vaccines unsafe, Twitter marks his tweets as 'misleading'". ThePrint. Retrieved 16 September 2021.
  53. Jain, Aaliyah (28 June 2021). "Prashant Bhushan Is Asking People Not To Take Covid Vaccines, Netizens React". www.scoopwhoop.com. Retrieved 16 September 2021.
  54. "India Against Corruption wants pictures of other freedom fighters on currency notes". Economic Times of India.
  55. "Activists to march against corruption". The Times of India. 28 January 2011. Archived from the original on 3 January 2013. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  56. "Activists to meet PM on Lokpal Bill". Sify News. 6 March 2011. Archived from the original on 9 March 2011. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  57. "Cracks in civil society over inclusion of father-son duo". DNA. 9 April 2011.
  58. Parsai, Gargi (18 April 2011). "CD is doctored: Prashant Bhushan". The Hindu. Archived from the original on 23 April 2011. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  59. Parsai, Gargi (6 May 2011). "Prashant denies telephoning Amar Singh to 'gag' him". The Hindu. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  60. "Basic principles of Lokpal Bill not negotiable, says Prashant Bhushan". Sify News. 23 May 2011. Archived from the original on 12 September 2015. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  61. Balchand, K. (31 May 2011). "Government going back on its word: Kejriwal". The Hindu. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  62. "Lokpal: key proposals made by Hazare team missing from govt. draft". The Hindu. 22 June 2011. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  63. "Govt. should withdraw its Lokpal Bill: Prashant Bhushan". Sify. 10 August 2011. Archived from the original on 23 March 2014.
  64. "Cabinet ministers taking decisions on Hazare's protest: Prashant Bhushan". India: The Economic Times. 16 August 2011. Archived from the original on 2 February 2014. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  65. "Prashant Bhushan refutes Digvijay Singh's stamp duty evasion charge". Sify News. 15 April 2011. Archived from the original on 15 March 2014. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  66. "Land transferred to Bhushan's trust, admits Dhumal, reminds Virbhadra of Tibetans". Chandigarh: The Indian Express. 24 February 2012. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  67. "Prashant Bhushan Had Called For Plebiscite in Kashmir". India TV. 12 October 2011. Retrieved 29 April 2012.
  68. "Prashant Bhushan beaten up; attackers justify 'brutal' act". One India News. 12 October 2011. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
  69. Sardesai, Rajdeep (13 October 2011). "My views on Kashmir not seditious, says Bhushan". CNN-IBN. Archived from the original on 14 October 2011. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
  70. "Register case against Bhushan for comment on Kashmir: Shiv Sena". DNA. 13 October 2011. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
  71. "Team Anna distances itself from Prashant Bhushan's comments on Kashmir". The Times of India. 14 October 2011. Archived from the original on 10 December 2013. Retrieved 28 April 2012.
  72. "Prashant Bhushan takes on Narendra Modi, calls him a Reliance puppet". India: The Economic Times. 9 January 2014. Archived from the original on 10 January 2014.
  73. "Will BJP snap its ties with RSS, asks AAP's Prashant Bhushan". India: The Economic Times. 8 February 2014. Archived from the original on 22 February 2014.
  74. "Will BJP snap its ties with RSS, asks Prashant Bhushan". Daily News and Analysis. India. 8 February 2014.
  75. Prashant Bhushan accuses Kejriwal of selecting candidates with money and muscle power to win?
  76. Yogendra Yadav, Prashant Bhushan sacked from AAP national executive
  77. AAP expels Yogendra Yadav, Prashant Bhushan
Categories: