"It added that the statements have cast serious aspersions upon the independence of the court giving an impression that the order passed by this court were an after-effect of the change in government at the Centre thereby undermining and scandalising the judicial process."
New Delhi, May 27 - A Delhi court Tuesday issued notice to two AAP leaders, including former Delhi minister Manish Sisodia, on a plea alleging that they have made contemptuous statement against courts on the issue of former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal's judicial custody.
The court order came on a plea alleging that Aam Aadmi Party leaders Sisodia and Gopal Rai had made statements about the independence of judiciary, which scandalised the court and the process of law in the eyes of the society.
The plea was filed by advocate Pankaj Mendiratta before Metropolitan Magistrate Gomati Manocha, who sent Kejriwal to judicial custody on May 21 and later extended it on May 23, after the former chief minister refused to furnish a personal bond in a defamation case filed against him by BJP leader Nitin Gadkari.
The petitioner has requested the court to take action for contempt of court against Sisodia and Rai.
The court, after considering the plea and issuing notice, fixed the matter for July 11 for further hearing.
The plea said the two leaders had made contemptuous statement May 21 on major TV news channels after the court sent Kejriwal to judicial custody following his refusal to furnish personal bond of Rs.10,000.
The above statements made on May 21 unambiguously have sent a wrong message to the public at large that the process so adopted by this court was not judicious and in accordance with law but was a result of change in the political scenario, the plea said.
It further said that the statements have been intentionally made to disrespect the course of law, and have tried to convey to the people that administration of justice is weak and in hands of the ruling government.
It added that the statements have cast serious aspersions upon the independence of the court giving an impression that the order passed by this court were an after-effect of the change in government at the Centre thereby undermining and scandalising the judicial process.
The contemnors (Sisodia and Rai) through their statements tried to convey to the people that the administration of justice is weak and is in the hands of the ruling government, the plea said.