Abhishek Manu Singhvi argues that the SC on August 21 had ordered for a hearing on Friday, August 23. Prosecution should not have acted in a way (by arresting Chidambaram on August 21) to render a judicial order ineffective.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was present in the Court when an order for hearing was passed. His client (CBI) should not have acted in this way then, Singhvi.
#Breaking: Supreme Court dismisses SLP filed by Chidambaram against Delhi High Court order denying him protection from arrest as far as CBI case is concerned. Court says matter is now infructuous.
Chidambaram granted liberty to move appropriate Court for regular bail
Supreme Court now hears the SLP filed in relation to the cases filed by ED against P Chidambaram.
Sibal questions the handing over of certain documents in a sealed cover to the Delhi High Court. He says that P Chidambaram was not aware of these documents/notes.
If they discovered some material between the time FIR was filed and I was arrested, they should have summoned me and interrogated me. They cannot spring it like a surprise in the Court, Sibal.
The Will that was spoken about by SG in the earlier hearing is in public domain. The attachment of properties is known. They cannot just make statements like this. ED's only case is that he is not cooperating. This is not fair, this is media trial, Sibal
SG has contended discovery of large number of mails, bank accounts, among other things. All this was never out to Chidambaram. He was examined by ED thrice and only once by the CBI. Neither agencies put any of this before him.
They have to clarify when these documents and notes were discovered. If it was before questioning, why didn't they confront him and if it was after questioning, then why was he not called again, Sibal
SG says Chidambaram is being evasive but the Court should peruse the questions that were put to him and the responses given by him to ascertain if he was being evasive.
The case is that Karti Chidambaram used his relationship with P Chidambaram to influence public servants to secure ex-post facto FIPB approvals for the downstream investment in INX media, Sibal
The CA Bhaskar Raman got bail, Karti Chidambaram got bail, Indrani and Peter Mukherjea are on default bail and no sanctions have been sought for the six government secretaries till now, Sibal
P Chidambaram is being made vicariously liable. The ED's case seems to be that since he's Karti's father, he must be involved... There is no chargesheet filed naming him so prima facie no offence has been committed, Sibal.
Sibal cites the judgment of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Gurbaksh Singh on the issue of right of an accused for anticipatory bail.
If there is a money trail, there must be documents and the source of the monies traceable. What are they trying to find out? First probe, find out and then seek custody, Sibal
If something is found after probing documents, it should be put before the accused for him to give an explanation. Here it's a one way street where documents are produced in Court but not put before accused, Sibal
Great ignominy and humiliation is attached to an arrest. The moment someone is arrested, you destroy that man. You make believe that the man js guilty. That is what is happening here, Sibal
On the Delhi High Court, Sibal says what is the application of mind of the Judge when certain paragraphs are a word for word, comma for comma copy of the note submitted by the SG?
That is exactly my objection that while he (SG) can put whatever he wishes before the Court but it should be put before me first. These are the procedural issues that need to be addressed in a case which involves personal liberty, Sibal
There is also another serious issue that why was the order reserved for seven month? It took him (Justice Sunil Gaur of the HC) 7 months to decide that there was gravity in the matter, Sibal
Their case is, and it is mentioned in the judgment, that Chidambaram has been evasive during questioning, then Your Lordships must ask for transcripts and decide if he was being evasive, Sibal
They (investigating agencies) are saying that they have cogent evidence against the petitioner and at the same time they say that evidence is yet to be unearthed. Then what is this cogent evidence then? - Sibal
They are claiming that there is apprehension of tampering of evidence. Tampering of what? Properties situated outside? Or bank accounts? If that tampering is possible, my arms must be really long, Sibal
Supreme Court to continue hearing the case tomorrow at 12 noon. P Chidambaram to file a rejoinder to the ED's affidavit. Interim protection from arrest granted to Chidambaram in the ED case to continue till tomorrow.
Supreme Court to resume hearing its suo motu case on stray dogs at 2pm today.
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria
Follow this thread for live updates.
#straydogs #SupremeCourt
On the last hearing, the Court had lamented that many lawyers argued on behalf of dog lovers in the case but nobody was arguing or putting forth the views on behalf of human beings.
Supreme Court to hear plea by Enforcement Directorate accusing West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and State officials of interfering with the central agency's investigation and search operations at the Kolkata offices of political consultancy firm I-PAC and its co-founder, Pratik Jain #SupremeCourt
#IPAC @MamataOfficial @dir_ed
Enforcement Directorate has also filed an application seeking suspension of West Bengal Police top brass, including DGP Rajiv Kumar, alleging they aided Mamata Banerjee in obstructing ED raids and removal of evidence; plea seeks directions to Ministry of Home Affairs and Department of Personnel and Training, and recalls Kumar’s past dharna with the CM as Kolkata Police Commissioner @MamataOfficial #IPAC @dir_ed
Justices Prashant Mishra and Vipul Pancholi assemble
@MamataOfficial #IPAC @dir_ed
Delhi High Court is hearing the petition filed by former Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav against a trial court order framing criminal charges against him and his family members in the alleged IRCTC scam case.
The matter is listed before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal arguing for Prasad - They [CBI] refer to 2 communications that have no relation to any corrupt practice.
Calcutta High Court to shortly hear petitions concerning the Enforcement Directorate’s recent raids on political consultancy firm I-PAC and the residence of its co-founder Pratik Jain.
Follow this thread for live updates 🧵
All India Trinamool Congress and the Enforcement Directorate have filed separate petitions. Justice Suvra Ghosh will hear the matter at 2:30 PM.
Supreme Court hears bail plea of Kashmiri separatist leader Shabir Ahmad Shah booked under the UAPA for conspiring to secede Jammu & Kashmir from India.
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta.
Sr. Adv. Colin Gonsalves (for Shah): the chargesheet mentioned a large number of accused persons.
Court: what is the primary allegation?
Gonsalves: yes. I will. I am not there in the main chargesheet. Not in the first supplementary chargesheet. I was added in the second supplementary chargesheet.
Court: you were booked for provocative speeches etc?
Gonsalves: yes and terror funding. The last speech I gave was in 1993. The story of terror funding was one one Mr. Wani was carrying money amounting to 75 lakhs meant for me. Wani was acquitted in the ED matter. I was given bail in the ED matter.
Court: since when are you in custody?
Gonsalves: total custody in and out all together is 40 years. In this last FIRs 6.5 years. The period of custody that I have undergone in all the FIRs is 40 years including detentions.
Supreme Court hears plea by Niranjan Das, an accused in the Chhattisgarh liquor scam case in which FIRs were registered in Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.
Das seeks transfer of trial in UP FIR to Chhattisgarh liquor scam. Bench led by CJI Surya Kant hears matter.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appears for Das.
CJI Surya Kant: You are saying the allegations in the two states are similar. But Coordinate bench says that they are state specific
Court notes that in UP FIR, there are co-accused from UP also. If trial is transferred in Das’ case, co-accused in UP also affected.
CJI: What about a (co-accused who is) permanent resident of Noida (if trial is transferrer to Raipur, Chhattisgarh)?