Custodial Interrogation is required to confront P Chidambaram with the relevant documents and other accused in the case to take the investigation further, Mehta
We are at pre chargesheet case. He is not providing all the documents required for investigation.. certain questions can be answered only when the accused is not under the protective umbrella.., Mehta.
Mere appearance becomes a formality when the accused in under the protective umbrella. This is a serious case..of monumental magnitude, Mehta concludes as he urges the Court to grant 5 days custody of P Chidambaram.
Kapil Sibal begins, informs the Court that co-accused Karti Chidambaram was granted regular bail by Delhi HC, Chartered Accountant Bhaskaraman is also on anticipatory bail.
Other accused, Peter and Indrani Mukherjea are on default bail, Sibal.
This is a case of documentary evidence. The Secretaries recommended the case to the Finance Minister and he approved.. The FIR was filed after 10 years, Sibal
Last night, the CBI said that they wanted to interrogate him... They didn't start the interrogate until 12 noon and asked him only 12 questions... By now they should know what questions to ask. The questions are not ready, Sibal
All co-accused are on bail.. they (prosecution) could have written a letter to me asking for the documents needed for investigation.. why did they not do that?, Sibal
When the judge reserved the Judgement for seven months, is this the 'protective umbrella' that I sought?, Sibal
I have serious objection with the manner in which the accused as dealt with.. What is written in the case diary is not evidence in the case but only to aid in such inquiry or trial, Sibal
P Chidambaram is a called four months after Indrani's statement is recorded in 2018.. for 11-12 months P Chidambaram is not called for interrogation, Singhvi.
To create a reason for custody now, they create a reason that Indrani is now an approver, Singhvi.
She turns approver in 2019 based on the same old statement given in 2018..Singhvi.
You (Prosecution) have not made allegations of tampering of evidence or flight risk against P Chidambaram, Singhvi.
Grant of remand is an exception. Investigating Agency must make out a strong case that without custody further investigation would be impossible, Singhvi reads out a Supreme Court judgement.
Further investigation is going on. We filed an affidavit before HC stating that further investigation under section 173 CrPc is going on. It is our statutory right.There is a need to interrogate, Mehta.
Justifying calling P Chidambaram for interrogation only once, Mehta says,
We had a reasonable ground to come to the conclusion that we may not be able to reach the truth unless the protective umbrella is removed.
The protection was removed only in August 2019 when the Delhi HC said that the gravity of the offense committed by the accused demanded denial of bail, Mehta.
A responsible Prosecution wouldn't reveal the chronology of the questions to be asked. Whatever questions were asked, were recorded.
I cannot be denied my right to interrogate.. it is my duty to the nation, Mehta
We are considering remand..flight risk etc are not relevant.. We are dealing with intelligent people.. we would be failing as Prosecution if we do not reach the root (of the matter), Mehta.
Sibal says he does not want the questions to be made public, only want to ascertain the genuineness of the question.
P Chidambaram permitted to speak.
On June 6, 2018, please ask for the transcript.. there is no question which has not been answered.
The allegation of 5 Million whatever were never put to me. Only asked me if I have a foreign bank account or my son who furnished the details.
Attorney General for India R Venkataramani to shortly make submissions before Supreme Court on the case challenging the validity of the Tribunal Reforms law #SupremeCourt
AG addresses individual applications first. CESTAT, ITAT etc
AG: there has been detailed deliberations within the government. We have also submitted a note.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi attends the Inaugural Session of National Conference on 'Strengthening Legal Aid Delivery Mechanisms' and Celebration of 'Legal Services Day'
#SupremeCourt @PMOIndia
CJI BR Gavai, CJI Designate Justice Surya Kant, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal present on dias @arjunrammeghwal #SupremeCourt @PMOIndia
@arjunrammeghwal @PMOIndia Justice Surya Kant: As demand for equal and affordable justice evolved, the enactment of Legal Services Authority act was a decisive moment
Supreme Court Justice Vikram Nath to shortly deliver the AK Sen memorial lecture, 2025.
Justice Nath: I am dumbfounded whether or not to deliver this memorial lecture, because after hearing all the interesting anecdotes and episodes and about the life of Mr. Sen, of which I have neither been associated, acquainted, or known, like Mr. Bagchi is from Calcutta, Dr. Singhvi remembers back to his father's time with Mr. Sen, Mr. Jayanta Mitra also has so many. If they could have continued, I would have enjoyed more. But since I have been assigned this job of delivering the lecture, I think now the boring part starts. All of you will have to suffer me and listen to this lecture, which is a scripted one…. I don't have anecdotes to narrate. If I could be excused, I would be very happy and request all the panelists to continue with some more. And I would say that my lecture is delivered….Reasons to follow and we can go ahead.
Justice Nath: People often call AK Sen the inevitable law minister. By that, they mean he was the person you naturally turned to when the country needed someone sensible to steer legal reform, someone who could talk to courts, to parliament, to the government, and to citizens without raising the temperature. He combined a lawyer's eye for detail with a public servant's instinct to explain and include. His promise showed early. At the age of 26, he authored a book on commercial law. It was endorsed by his senior, Sri Sudhiranjan Das, who would later become Chief Justice of India.
Madras Bar Association case challenging the validity of the Tribunal Reforms Act
Senior Advocate Arvind Datar to make submissions today
CJI BR Gavai: Let us see if Attorney General appears at 2 pm. He had said he will
#SupremeCourt
Sr Adv Arvind Datar: This case started 34 years ago in 1991 so as to say.
CJI: AG attempted to make submissions on the merits of the provisions.
Datar: 50 years eligibility, 4 years tenure and search cum selection committee... These are the three areas..now for 50 years.... It is about giving a chance..
CJI: see I became a judge at 42, maybe I did not have adequate experience at that time
Datar: I don't want to commit contempt
Justice Vinod Chandran: order of a 50 year old tribunal judge will be dealt by a 45 year old High Court judge !
Senior Advocate Arvind Datar: typically an additional secretary is something which a candidate becomes at 50 ..... The best tribunal ITAT which functioned for so long and model followed throughout.. but now we have dismantled it in a very perverse way. No empirical evidence to show that 50 is the best entry age. Justice Ravindra Bhat devotes 14 paras why 50 should not be cut off and when you make a law you must see what SC has said.
Stray dogs case: Supreme Court to continue monitoring compliance of Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 in various states.
Chief Secretaries of all states except Delhi, Telangana, and West Bengal to appear before the Court today with compliance affidavits for their respective states.
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria
All Chief Secretaries present in Court.
Sr. Adv. AM Singhvi: your lordships may limit entry only for this case. It’s really difficult to come in.
Justice Nath: I had suggested an auditorium…. Who appears for Andhra Pradesh? What’s your explanation? Why was no affidavit filed on the previous date?
CS Andhra Pradesh inaudible.
The Court reviews affidavits.
SG Tushar Mehta: all states have filed compliance affidavits.
Justice Nath: all states have filed their compliance affidavits. Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu have not filed.
Singhvi: many of the vital facts are not stated in the affidavits, number of ABC centres, number of dogs sterilised, budget allocations, unless these parameters are known it is not be possible to deal with it state wise. Some of my colleagues have done the exercise, they may make a chart..
Supreme Court hears plea pertaining to appointment of information commissioners.
Bench: Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi
Adv Prashant Bhushan: this is regarding appointment to information commissions. It has been 10 months from the last order. There are so many orders asking to appoint and the pendency is just skyrocketing. The RTI is being destroyed by not appointing information commissioners.
Bhushan: earlier what they had done is they air dropped one person, a journalist who was singing praises of the government and without any qualifications he was air dropped.
Justice Kant: sometimes people don’t apply. We can’t doubt everything. We exercise suo moto powers in case of senior designations because people don’t apply.