In the ongoing saga between the Bhushan father-son duo and the Supreme Court, Prashant Bhushan (pictured) has filed a supplementary affidavit in the contempt petition before the Supreme Court of India. This latest move comes just two days after his father, former Law Minister; Shanti Bhushan sought to make himself a party in contempt proceedings against his son.

Shanti Bhushan had created a country wide furore when he had said that 8 of the last 16 Chief Justices of India have been corrupt and had also give a sealed envelope containing the names of the corrupt judges. Speaking to Bar & Bench, Prashant Bhushan had said that he would be filing an affidavit over the weekend.

In the latest affidavit filed by Prashant Bhushan, the Senior Advocate has given ‘evidence’ which in his opinion proves the corruption charges levied by him. Most of the ‘evidence’ is in the form of inferences drawn from judgements and statements regarding the houses, lands and other amenities that have been accorded to the judges who were part of the bench deciding these cases.

However, in the affidavit Prashant Bhushan does make it clear that when he called into question current CJI S.H. Kapadia’s involvement in the Vedanta matter, he was not referring to the financial integrity of the CJI but merely that the judgement passed by him was questionable since he held Vedanta shares.

Further reading of the affidavit does throw up some interesting questions regarding the soundness of the verdict of the apex court in various matters, especially the Vedanta case.

He charges that instead of taking various reports about Vedanta's violations, the "Court didn't find time to hear the matter till the refinery came to be constructed, in violation of the Forest Conservation Act. The court then proceeded to grant forest clearance for the mining lease, without even hearing the tribals or dealing with the very serious issues raised by its own expert body. Ignoring all the above issues, the court merely said that it needs to balance environment with development and by ordering that 5 percent of the mining profits should be earmarked for social development, goes on to allow Sterlite, a sister company of Vedanta to set up the refinery and do the mining in this region despite noting that Vedanta must be blacklisted for its record of dishonesty." 

Bhushan also calls into question the continuing involvement of Amicus Curiae, Harish Salve who was supposedly on a retainer by the Vedanta group and hence there is a clear conflict of interest.

While many may dismiss the Bhushan duo as rabid rabble rousers with the Times of India quoting Former Attorney General Soli Sorabjee on Shanti Bhushan's application. He said the senior Bhushan's application seeking contempt proceedings against himself was nothing but "filial loyalty, irresistible itch for martyrdom and ravages of old-age". It is extremely important that the SC take note of the allegations made in the affidavit and launch a preliminary investigation.

Failure on the part of the apex court to act swiftly and decisively will only lead to a loss of credibility, a risk that the SC cannot take in the present situation

A copy of Prashant Bhushan’s affidavit can be found here.