Post

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Aug 26, 2019 • 58 tweets • 34 min read • Read on X

Scrolly

@PChidambaram_IN

INX Media: Hearing in the plea challenging Delhi High Court order denying anticipatory bail to P Chidambaram begins.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

Justice Banumathi suggests that as far as the CBI is concerned, it has been rendered infructuous.

Sibal opposes and says that the matter was pending when the arrest was made
"I have a right to be heard"

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram

The SC order was for hearing, not listing. I was not given a hearing. I was entitled to anticipatory bail and I should have been heard, Sibal

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram

@PChidambaram_IN

Justice Banumathi says we far as the CBI application is concerned, we arw not hearing it.

We cannot convert the SLP where you are challenging the HC order to bail plea.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

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.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

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.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

The CBI had no business arresting P Chidambaram when the plea was pending here, Singhvi.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

#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

@PChidambaram_IN

Supreme Court now hears the SLP filed in relation to the cases filed by ED against P Chidambaram.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

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.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

It can't be that they (ED) will hand over any documents they want to the Court without making me privy to the contents, Sibal

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

The Counter affidavit that they were to file was leaked to the Press. It is the front page story in the Indian Express today, Sibal.

Tushar Mehta opposes, says they didn't leak the affidavit but it was leaked after it was served to Chidambaram.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram

@PChidambaram_IN

Sibal argues on Article 21 and says liberty cannot be denied to a person without due procedure of law.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

The attempt to produce documents without the accused ever knowing what is being produced is in violation of Fundamental Rights, Sibal

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

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.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

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

#INXMedia
#PChidambaram

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.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram

And these documents spoken of is to prejudice the case against Chidambaram. The procedure is not followed and is in violation of Article 21, Sibal.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram

@PChidambaram_IN

Even now these questions are not put before him. Only question bring asked to him is of he has an account in the Coutts Bank, Sibal

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

He's being asked questions like "do you have a Twitter account"... This is the quality of investigation during custodial interrogation, Sibal

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

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.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

This is my serious objection to documents being given to Court in sealed cover which were never put before P Chidambaram.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

Sibal detailing the facts of the INX Media case and the allegations made against P Chidambaram.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

@PChidambaram_IN

The Bench rises for lunch. The hearing to continue thereafter.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

INX Media: Court assembles to resume hearing in the case. Senior Counsel Kapil Sibal continues with his arguments.

#INXMediacase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

@PChidambaram_IN

All the then six FIPB secretaries have been examined and none of them said that Karti Chidambaram approached them, Sibal

#INXMediaScam
#PChidambaram
@PChidambaram_IN

Statements of these officers are also part of the attachment proceedings where they have said that Karti never approached them, Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

Their case talks about Advantage Strategies but Karti is neither a Director of the company, nor a shareholder, Sibal.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

@dir_ed

Sibal again raises the issue of documents put before the High Court in sealed cover by the ED.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram
@dir_ed

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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?

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

SG Tushar Mehta intervenes, "I don't know where they got this note from. It was not in record"

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

Sibal responds to SG, you have not even denied the note.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

Is there no counter to that note? - Justice Banumathi

No - Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

These are not documents, these are conclusions. How can a decision of the High Court be based on such conclusions? - Sibal, referring to the note

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

SG Tushar Mehta requests to take a look at the note Sibal has been referring to.

"We have not filed this note. We have placed case diaries", Mehta says after seeing the note

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

The Judge says the petitioner is the "kingpin". On what grounds is he saying this, Sibal

He says on what grounds... You are questioning a Constitutional body so I have to interject, Mehta

Am I not entitled to question the judgement, Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

The case diary which is the basis for the judgement and that is exactly what I want to produce before the Court today, Mehta

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

The HC judgment also mentions the Aircel Maxis case. Now what has that case got to do with this matter? - Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

How does any Court come to a conclusion that this requires my custodial interrogation? - Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

Let them give at least one bank account and one property details and the link between that and P Chidambaram, Sibal

I'll show all account details, SG Tushar Mehta

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

It is not relevant what I was in the past but what is relevant is how the agencies are conducting the proceedings, Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

Yes that's what it shows that tampering was done, SG Tushar Mehta

I mean your arms are much longer than mine which is why you are there and I'm here arguing this case, Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

Let's assume that I have tampered with the evidence, then that's fait accompli, they should prove it in the Court of Law, Sibal

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

Sibal citing some judgments to buttress his case.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

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.

#INXMediaCase
#PChidambaram

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 27

[SIR JUDGMENT SUMMARISED]
Thread 👇

Supreme Court recognises Election Commission’s power to conduct Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls under Article 324 and Section 21(3) of the RP Act, while upholding the Bihar SIR.

The Court says EC can undertake a limited electoral inquiry into citizenship, but cannot finally determine citizenship. Deleted persons must be referred to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act #SIR #supremecourt @ECISVEEP

Judgment in a nutshell👇

• Supreme Court holds that the Election Commission has power to conduct Special Intensive Revision under Article 324 and Section 21(3) of the RP Act.

• The ruling arises from the Bihar SIR, but the legal principle laid down concerns the EC’s broader power to undertake SIR exercises.

• Court says SIR is a special statutory mechanism distinct from ordinary revision under Section 21(2) and Rule 25.

• Bench holds that free and fair elections depend on the integrity, accuracy and credibility of electoral rolls.

• Court finds the Bihar SIR was backed by legitimate constitutional purpose and was not merely an administrative exercise.

• SC holds that the SIR framework satisfies proportionality, given the safeguards of notice, hearing, objections, speaking orders and appeal.

• Court says inclusion in electoral rolls creates a rebuttable presumption of validity, not an absolute bar on verification.

• EC can examine citizenship only for deciding inclusion or exclusion from electoral rolls, not to finally declare citizenship status.

• Deletion on citizenship doubts does not mean the person is declared a non citizen. Final adjudication lies with authorities under the Citizenship Act.

• EC must refer persons deleted from the 2003 Bihar roll on citizenship grounds to the competent authority within four weeks.

[What favours the petitioners in the Supreme Court’s Bihar SIR ruling]

• Court clarifies EC cannot finally determine citizenship and its findings are confined only to electoral consequences.

• SC says inclusion in electoral rolls creates a rebuttable presumption in favour of existing electors.

• Bench directs that persons deleted on citizenship grounds must be referred to competent authorities under the Citizenship Act within 4 weeks.

• Court emphasises notice, hearing, speaking orders, appeals and judicial review as mandatory safeguards against arbitrary exclusion.

Read 4 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 27

Supreme Court to resume hearing today pleas challenging the 2023 law that replaced the CJI with a Union Cabinet Minister on the panel appointing Election Commissioners.

Bench: Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma

The matter is adjourned. Tentatively posted on 30th July.

While the matter was getting adjourned, and the next date was being fixed, the bench discussed about Court vacations:

Adv Prashant Bhushan presses for the matter to be listed immediately upon reopening.

Court: we can have it in August.

Bhushan: not possible in July?

Court: first two weeks, it requires some time for the engine to warm up, after 6 weeks of holidays..

SG Tushar Mehta: the vacation is already curtailed.

Justice Sharma: our vacation is further curtailed by 2 weeks. I can go out only after 15th. And final hearing cases are being listed (during vacations).

Read 8 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 27

#SupremeCourt to pronounce today its verdict on the batch of petitions challenging the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls in Bihar, a case that has triggered one of the most consequential constitutional debates on voting rights, citizenship verification and electoral integrity in recent years #SIR @ECISVEEP @_YogendraYadav @adrspeaks

The challenge before the Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant raises critical questions on the EC’s powers under Article 326, the Representation of the People Act and whether the revision exercise risked large-scale disenfranchisement ahead of elections #SIR

During hearings, petitioners alleged the process could exclude genuine voters through onerous documentation requirements, while the EC defended the exercise as necessary to cleanse voter rolls and verify citizenship claims #SIR

Read 4 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 26

Supreme Court is hearing the plea filed by the Management Committee of Thakur Shri Banke Bihari Ji Maharaj Temple challenging the Uttar Pradesh government’s move to take over the administration of the famed Vrindavan temple through a statutory trust framework.

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan is leading arguments for the temple management

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the Banke Bihari temple Goswamis, tells Supreme Court that the current Goswami representatives in the High Powered Committee do not enjoy the confidence of the larger Goswami community.

Divan says 197 Goswamis from the Sayanthok and 46 from the Rajbhog gave consent through a Google form endorsing the representatives elected in the June 13, 2025 General Body meeting.

“There is a communication gap between the committee and the Goswami members,” Divan submits, adding that traditional rituals followed “for centuries” are not being adequately conveyed before decisions are taken.

He urges the Court to either accept the four representatives proposed by the Goswamis or conduct fresh elections. Alternatively, he suggests expanding the Goswami representation in the committee by adding three more members.

Divan also opposes changes made to temple darshan timings by the committee’s September 19, 2025 order, saying rituals and timings followed “since time immemorial” should not be disturbed.

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan: The deity is a living child. There is a period for the waking of the deity. There are rituals which are performed. There is an afternoon rest period, etc. Therefore, the timings should not be changed. This is something which is deeply embedded in the rituals.

The rituals are being performed. There are certain Goswamis there, but there is a lot of dissatisfaction amongst the members. They are saying, look, you cannot have this. The deity timings are now being shifted. This is not correct according to us.

This is a pro tem arrangement being made by a committee, an ad hoc committee appointed until the constitutional challenge is determined by the High Court. Therefore, the question we ask ourselves is, why should there be a change in timing?

This is something which is deeply embedded in the rituals. So we have raised it.

Read 12 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 26

[Ajay Kumar Shyamkishor vs Registrar General]

Supreme Court hears plea challenging minimum viva voce cut-off in judicial service recruitment

Adv Prashant Bhushan: The number of people finally selected are often only one-fourth or one-fifth of the total candidates. One of the major reasons for candidates not being selected is that they fail to meet the cut-off. Sometimes they fail the written examination cut-off, but very often they fail the interview cut-off. In this case, the petitioner secured very high marks in the written examination. In fact, one of them secured the third highest marks in the written exam and was awarded 18 out of 50 in the interview. The minimum qualifying mark was 20. That is why, My Lords, we are before this Court.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi: what we are saying is that in panel interviews, the panelists are not aware of the written marks obtained by the candidates.

Bhushan: It may not be a ground, I am not saying that. But they are aware that the interview has a minimum cut-off. Suppose out of 100 marks, unless a candidate is awarded 40 marks, that candidate cannot be selected. The panelists know that.... this is a larger issue which perhaps this Court now needs to revisit. Unfortunately, there are several decisions of different Benches. Some judgments say minimum cut-off marks in interviews cannot be prescribed. Others say they can be prescribed.

There are also judgments following the Kothari Commission recommendations which state that interview marks should ordinarily be restricted to 12.5 percent. Cases like Ashok Yadav deal with this aspect. Here, the interview component itself is 20 percent, and within that 20 percent, the qualifying threshold is 40 percent.

There are also recommendations that where written examination marks are higher, the interview component should be kept lower, around 12 percent. But in judicial service examinations, candidates are appearing after a minimum of seven years of practice. Therefore, the larger question is whether there should at all be a minimum cut-off for interviews.

SC: It is not that we are unwilling to examine the issue. But a larger judicial services matter is already pending before a three judges bench. There are issues relating to judicial service recruitment already pending consideration. You may assist the Court by collating comparative information and preparing a chart regarding practices followed across different States.

Bhushan: At least one argument can always be made that States have their own services and therefore some degree of variation may exist. However, in at least three cases, this Court has observed that where only one-fourth of the vacancies are ultimately filled, that itself demonstrates a problem with the selection process.

CJI: In some of the HC we came to know on administrative side.. suppose a person from north qualified and appears in the southern court.. and then sometimes they are marked low due to language barrier. But your case is not that.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi: The issue is also one of employment. There are a large number of law graduates and many candidates take these examinations. But when recruitment takes place, there has to be a minimum standard.

CJI Surya Kant: We have to see whether we have a market of meritorious candidates.

Read 4 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

May 25

Supreme Court to hear the suo motu case focussing on alleged bias and irregularities in the probe into Twisha Sharma's death #TwishaSharma #SupremeCourt

CJI Kant: We are slightly pained. We request media not take statements of friends or relatives etc. the mother in law is a former district judge and it is unfortunate that it is being said judiciary is detailing the trial..

Sr Adv Siddharth Dave: I appear for the accused. My section 161 statement is in newspaper today

CJi: We are against the narrative that is being created. That is why learned CBI should take it over. We beleive the state police and judiciary

SG Mehta: This former judge has been giving interviews in some or other channel maligning the deceased. We requested her so many times to record her statement she does not want to do it. We were okay to go to her place also. But she is not cooperating.

SG Mehta appearing for the state of Madhya Pradesh

SG: now it has gone to CBI

CJI: yes the decision is very fair. That is why state gave it to the CBI.

Dave: the mother in law's statement was recorded thrice.

CJI: once state has entrusted CBI we don't have to ...

Sr Adv Sidharth Luthra: Let there be DoPT notification be out so that CBI can take it over.

Justice Bagchi: This is an administrative exercise between state and CBI now..

Read 12 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Bar and Bench

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!