Just a few hours after Supreme Court’s official website showed that a contempt case had been registered against journalist Rajdeep Sardesai, the apex court clarified that no contempt proceedings have in fact been initiated against Sardesai. Additionally, the Supreme Court said that the notice was “placed inadvertently” on the website. According to reports, the sources, the Supreme Court has termed this as an “administrative error”.

Official communication issued by the Supreme Court said, “This is in context with news item being flashed in some news channels about initiating suo moto criminal contempt proceeding against Mr Rajdeep Sardesai by Supreme Court, it is made clear that no such proceeding has been initiated against Mr Rajdeep Sardesai. However, the status shown on the Supreme Court website vide case no. SMC (Crl) 02/2021 has been placed inadvertently.”

Earlier on Tuesday, Indian news media took notice of the Supreme Court’s website which showed that a petition was filed by a Haryana-based law student Aastha Khurana. Khurana filed the petition through her advocate Omprakash Parihar on September 21, 2020, which was registered on February 13, 2021.

Khurana alleged that some of Sardesai’s comments on the Supreme Court which came in form of tweets were “disrespectful” and fell within a definition which “scandalizes the court. Her petition claimed that “On each judgment, the alleged contemnor/respondent has passed various disrespectful comments and questioned the fairness and credibility of this hon’ble court.”

In one tweet, Sardesai criticised the apex court over the Prashant Bhushan ruling claiming that the Supreme Court had the time to hear a contempt case while petitions of detained Kashmiris are still pending for more than one year after article 370 was scrapped. In this particular tweet, he commented on how the Supreme Court fast-tracked Prashant Bhushan’s case while the habeas corpus petitions remained pending.

“The reputation of Supreme Court as one of the great pillars of our democracy has been built assiduously over the last 70 years. Trifling remarks and mere passing criticism though perhaps distasteful are unlikely to tarnish the image of the institution,” Venugopal had said, replying to Parihar who had sought his consent for initiating contempt proceedings against Sardesai.

In another tweet, Sardesai attacked Supreme Court saying that the contempt of the court case against Prashant Bhushan was an embarrassment of the Supreme Court’s own making. In another tweet, Sardesai questioned how courts did their job.

Khurana’s petition made notice of one more Sardesasi tweet in July 2020 about former Supreme Court judge Justice Arun Mishra who was heading the bench in the Prashant Bhushan contempt case. The tweet, which was deleted later, said how Justice Mishra is the same judge who called PM Narendra Modi a “versatile genius.”

As Rajdeep Sardesai is an influential news anchor whose word might be taken as the gospel, Khurana alleged that his tweets “repeatedly disrespected” the top court and “cannot be protected for being free speech and expression.”

To hear a contempt case, the Supreme Court requires an Attorney General or a Solicitor General present. Khurana had therefore approached Supreme Court Attorney General KK Venugopal Rao to give his consent. However, on hearing Khurana’s plea, Venugopal Rao said, “The reputation of the Supreme Court as one of the great pillars of our democracy has been built assiduously over the last 70 years.” He also added, “Trifling remarks and mere passing criticism though perhaps distasteful are unlikely to tarnish the image of the institution.”

Earlier last month, Rajdeep Sardesai, along with several other journalists and the Member of Parliament Shashi Tharoor were booked by Noida Police. The journalists along with MP Tharoor were booked for sedition and for tweeting what they claimed was ‘fake news’ about the death of a farmer on the tractor rally that turned violent on January 26. However, the top court had stayed the arrest of Sardesai, Tharoor and other journalists on February 9.