Thread by @SaketGokhale

Something MASSIVELY odd at the SC registry:

In April, I filed a PIL in the SC seeking a probe into Modi's undeclared assets.

SC registry gave me a list of "defects" on 16 Apr that needed to be cured to list my PIL.

These were simple clerical defects (screenshots). (1/13)

I cleared the defects & re-submitted the petition on 26th April. I'd cleared all defects that were informed to me as well as listed on the SC website for my PIL.

I'd requested an urgent hearing in the case and requested the registry to list the matter as soon as possible (2/13)

I kept checking the SC website after that for 10 days to see if defects been cleared (which usually takes 2 days max).

I called up the SC registry & was told "there are more defects. Pls come here & we'll tell u".

Funnily, nothing was yet updated on the website. (3/13)

When I visited the registry, I was handed my PIL copy with some more defects. Ideally, these should have been given to me the first time itself.

Some of these "new defects" in the list were, ironically, defects that I'd already cleared.

And there was a BIG surprise. (4/13)

The registry had asked me to clarify "Why has Respondent 3 (H'nble Prime Minister) been made a party to this case?"

This was bizarre - why does one have to clarify that PM Modi will, obviously, be a party in a PIL against PM Modi's assets? It makes zero logical sense. (5/13)

I was representing myself in this case without a lawyer. Even when I showed this to friends who are lawyers, they found it very bizarre.

Everyone I spoke to said that it seemed like I was being made to run in circles to avoid/stall my PIL being listed. (6/13)

On 25 July. even the Honorable Chief Justice expressed displeasure over the functioning of the SC registry with regard to non-listing of cases for urgent hearing & also said that "there was something fundamentally wrong" about the SC registry.

Clearly, it wasn't only me. (7/13)

Also in Anil Ambani's Ericsson case, he was asked to personally appear for contempt of court proceedings.

In the uploaded order, the SC registry said Ambani’s presence in the case HAD been dispensed with, instead of stating that it HAD NOT been dispensed with. (8/13)

Due to this 2 court officers were immediately sacked. It is reported that a preliminary investigation also found that the mistake was NOT accidental/unintentional.

Was Anil Ambani being protected by a few registry officials? It's a matter worth pondering. (9/13)

In my PIL, I have serious concerns that some entities in the registry are making an attempt to protect PM Modi by raising such frivolous questions as "defects" to prevent listing of my case.

To ask me why Modi has been made a party to a case against Modi is surreal. (10/13)

To decide whether someone can be made a party to a case is the prerogative of the judiciary & H'nble judges. If my petition has no merit, the judiciary will dismiss it or remove PM Modi as a respondent.

It is shocking that these decisions are being made by the registry. (11/13)

Example - advocate M L Sharma's petition on #Article370 was listed for hearing even though it was full of defects. Shouldn't SC registry have flagged it?

On the other hand, #PChidambaram didn't get an urgent hearing because the registry flagged "defects" in his plea. (12/13)

I'll be writing a letter to the H'nble Chief Justice today praying for his intervention into this matter.

I'm not a lawyer & I'm a man of limited means.

How can I seek justice in a matter of immense public interest if some powerful entities are being protected?

(13/13)

You might wanna see this thread @SunilBishnoi_3