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.
Delhi High Court stays further investigation and proceedings in FIR lodged against Tamil Nadu MLA and Secretary of Student Wing Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), C.V.M.P. Ezhilarasan, for organising a protest challenging proposed UGC laws, at Jantar Mantar on February 6.
The matter was listed before Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani.
Senior Amit Anand Tiwari appeared for the politician. He stated that the perusal of the FIR would itself show that there is no allegation that the peaceful protest held by the petitioner and his associates caused any obstruction, annoyance or injury or risk.
Supreme Court resumes hearing the plea against Ladakh-based activist Sonam Wangchuk’s detention under the NSA.
Bench: Justices Aravind Kumar and PB Varale
Notably, Wangchuk’s detention was revoked by the Centre on March 14.
@Wangchuk66
While revoking Wangchuk’s detention earlier this month, the Centre said the decision was taken after considering the need to foster “an environment of peace, stability, and mutual trust” in Ladakh.
Supreme Court Bar Association flags off its first National Conference on the theme “reimagining judicial governance: strengthening institutions for democratic justice”.
Justice Mehta: if a true picture is provided to litigants by lawyers at the first stage the chances of mediation succeeding would increase manifold.
Justice Mehta: But the most stumbling roadblock is the government. The experience in the national Lok Adalats where we hold pre-litigation mediation sessions is sad to say the least. There is hardly a single department of this government which comes forward with a positive response.
The person who is an accused is praying for protection? You are a suspected accused. You are trying to sensationalise the issue: Uttarakhand High Court to gym owner ‘Mohammad’ Deepak Kumar
The Court is hearing a plea filed by Kumar seeking quashing of an FIR agains him.
I have been receiving consistent threats: Kumar’s counsel
You are investigation: Court
That is a different thing: Counsel
[Day 2]: A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court to resume hearing reference on the interpretation of “industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, in the State of UP v. Jai Bir Singh batch of cases
#SupremeCourt
A nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court begins hearing reference on the interpretation of “industry” under the Industrial Disputes Act, in the State of UP v. Jai Bir Singh batch of cases
#SupremeCourt
Sr Adv CU Singh: There are two notifications ... Now the old industrial disputes act has been repealed.
Sr Adv Indira Jaising: Any judgment rendered by the court in interpretation of the old law will impact the new law. One side seeks reconsideration of Bangalore water supply and one side says no such reconsideration needed.
CJI: While taking a view on Bangalore water supply .. we can give a word of caution that the interpretation is for the law which used to exist
Jaising: There is an unavoidable overlap. All conclusions should be without prejudice.
AG R Venkataramani: so whether a challenge to the new law can lie when there is no such challenge before this court
AG: I have placed my written submissions and compilations for the Court’s consideration; I will be referring in particular to Volumes 4B and 5B. The principal issue, as framed, is whether an undertaking or enterprise falls within the definition of “industry” under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act and what the correct legal position is. A second, distinct issue arises from the 1982 Amendment, particularly in the context of social welfare activities and governmental functions, and whether such activities fall within the expression “enterprise.” This in turn raises the question of what constitutes a “sovereign function” of the State and whether such functions are excluded from the ambit of Section 2(j). To address this, it is necessary to go back to the earlier reference order and the line of judgments beginning with Bangalore Water Supply.