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 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.
Supreme Court to shortly hear the issue concerning stray dogs and the Pan India policy on Animal Birth control rules implementation #SupremeCourt
Sr Adv Sidharth Luthra: One matter has come from High court. All matters are here
Justice Vikram Nath: we do not have compliance affidavit by any of the states.
Adv: MCD (Delhi) has filed it, Telangana, West Bengal.. also
Luthra: We have not been supplied
SC: only three compliance affidavits are filed but not on record. They are Telangana, WB and MCD. Notices was issued to all states and UTs. Let all be present before this court on 10:30 am next Monday along with explanation as to why not filed and no representation also here from the three mentioned here.
Delhi High Court heard the submissions of intervenor Broadband India Forum in the copyright suit filed by ANI against OpenAI.
Senior Advocate Arvind Datar is appearing for Broadband India Forum.
The matter is being heard by Justice Amit Bansal.
Datar - LLM can access a large amount of information and create a unique response. We represent large players who have their own LLM models. Once the item is in public domain, I cannot verbatim reproduce it but I can access it.
Delhi High Court is hearing the suit filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI) concerning copyright, trademark infringement suit against digital content creator and YouTuber Mohak Mangal.
Mangal has filed a fresh application seeking reinstatement of ten videos taken down by YouTube due to copyright strike by ANI.
Senior Advocate Diya Kapur and Advocate Nakul Gandhi are appearing for Mangal.
Sr Adv Kapur - They give me option to give a counter. The Court has not given injunction but this soverreign function is being discharged by YoutTube that the videos cannot be re-instated.
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting gives an undertaking before Delhi High Court to formulate final guidelines for disabled friendly accessibility features on OTT platforms.
The matter was listed before Justice Sachin Datta.
The petitioners, specially abled visually impaired persons, were aggrieved by the lack of disabled friendly accessibility features in the recent Bollywood blockbuster movies on OTT platform.
"Shoe throwing incident" mentioned before Justice Surya Kant led bench
SCBA President Vikas Singh: This shoe throwing incident cannot go unnoticed like this. This person has no remorse. I have sought consent from attorney general and the criminal contempt be listed tomorrow. Social media has gone berserk
SG Tushar Mehta: consent has been given...It is the institutional integrity at stake.
Justice Surya Kant: We are all for free speech. Problem is how to regulate.
SG: The opportunity this institution missed taking and some action was needed.
Justice Kant: CJI has shown magnanimity and it shows that Institution is not affected as such
SG: The way this social media is being uncontrollably used..some are making a glory out of this.. and some are speaking of his courage etc. This is about institution..it cannot go on.
SC: We will treat this matter uninfluenced by anything else.
Sr Adv Singh: This is an insult to Lord Vishnu also. I am sure he took would not want this.
Justice Kant: Our religion has never promoted violence. Just think about this..in social media everything becomes a saleable thing.