Thread by @barandbench

#2G: Delhi High Court to shortly begin hearing appeals preferred by CBI and Enforcement Directorate against the acquittal of all accused in 2G Spectrum case.

Justice Brijesh Sethi is hearing the appeals on a day-to-day basis.

#ARaja #2GAppeals

@dir_ed

Hearing begins.

#2G #2GAppeal

Appeals are at the stage of 'leave to appeal'.

Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain appears for the investigating agencies.

I have to conclude my submissions: Jain

Just to have a quick recap of what I argued yesterday... I navigated through five documents on appointment of SPPs in 2G cases and the sanction order: ASG Jain

I briefly took the court through section 378 CrPC and full Bench judgement of P&H HC: Jain

ASG Jain states the facts of P&H HC judgment.

So far as direction to file an appeal is concerned, it is administrative. Admin decision is within the executive powers of the government. The statue does not require to show the process: Jain

The respondents have done their duty to bring to the notice of the court the requirements of section 378(2). The role of Respondents is over. Thereafter it is the role to teh court to satisfy it's conscience: Jain

The documents were shared by the court. The only thing that could be argued was with respect to the decision making process. But this case is not writ jurisdiction. It is an appeal: Jain

I've shown the notification in favour of the Prosecutor concerned. A designated senior can instruct another advocate on his behalf. This is something which is otherwise coming out from the relevant provisions of CrPC: Jain

It is nobody's case that Mr Bhandari does not have the eligibility: Jain

S Bhandari is the public prosecutor who filed the appeal.

The court may also have a look at Sec 25A (8) CrPC on Directorate of Prosecution: Jain

If we treat the office of AG and SG as Directorate as Prosecution, no question mark can be raised. In this case, this issue is purely academic. There is a notification in favour of the SPPs: Jain

A senior designate need not personally sign the appeal. Another competent person/PP has signed the appeal. This is sufficient compliance of Section 378 CrPC: Jain

No further scrutiny is required in this case: Jain

Jain concludes.

The court may decide the application.. otherwise the purpose of the early hearing order will be defeated: Jain

Adv Vijay Aggarwal for Asif Balwa (applicant) begins.

What was my prayer.. supply of copy of mandatory approval and files..: Aggarwal

I only asked for documents. I will first rejoin the arguements. They say allegations are made in vacuum. I've only asked for documents. Where are the allegations: Aggarwal

I've also made a similar application.. : Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra who appears for Siddharth Behura

Let Mr Aggarwal go on then I will start. These are jurisdictional facts.. if I raise a jurisdictional fact, it has to be considered. Notice will have to be issued: Luthra

When you are asking leave to appeal.. the first is the hurdle on jurisdiction. Before 2007, if I didn't have a vakalatnama, I could not appear: Luthra

It impacts the rights of the accused. The interpretation of Section 378.. there is a series of mechanics. We are not making casual submission: Luthra

I am only seeking documents. I have a strong reservation. It was said allegations are being made in vacuum. I will show the fullness after I get the documents. I faced allegations for 7 years: Aggarwal

They have only responded orally. The way it was suggested.. the Court heard it for two days. We have not challenged anything. I'm not saying that I will not point fingers. I will but in writing : Aggarwal

We are not saying that till this thing gets decided don't hear it. I'm entitled in law to say that the court should first decide the maintainability.. formal notice has to be issued.. The documents have to be part of the record. It can't be simply shared on screen: Aggarwal

Sharing documents will not form part of the record if either party decides to go in appeal. Whatever they say has to be on affidavit: Aggarwal

First day it was said that ASG Jain was appearing after being instructed by the Standing Counsel Ripudaman.. now there is a DoPT notification.. it has to come in writing : Aggarwal

Documents served to us are truncated: Aggarwal

Senior Adv N Hariharan for Reliance says that he has not received any documents.

If required, we will move an application.. everyone has a stake in it : Hariharan

Yes, it must be shared with all : Court

Court asks the CBI counsel send the documents to all.

We're sending it immediately: Adv Ripudaman

Aggarwal points that notification and approval on ASG Jain was not shared.

They've sent the label but not the bottle: Aggarwal

They have shared the proposal to file the appeal. It is not an order. It was some advise and not a direction: Aggarwal on the document shared by CBI as a sanction letter.

Let us see the third document.. Mr Sanjeev Bhandari.. he was appointed by SPP on 6 March 2014. That is when Mr Lalit was there in the picture and trial was on: Aggarwal

2G is a separate class of case. Court passed a judicial order saying case is important. Mr Mehta's appointment shows that it is for 2G case.. a special class..2G is a special class: Aggarwal

Aggarwal states that appointment of Sanjeev Bhandari was a general appointment and not for 2G cases.

Notification is not enclosed. All these are internal communications.. I will argue all this in writing once I get the documents: Aggarwal

In 2G case, everything is special: Aggarwal

I'm not talking about Directorate of Prosecution: Aggarwal

There are no annexure and enclosures: Aggarwal

Court can exercise power under Art 226, sec 151 CPC and sec 482 CrPc at any time in any jurisdiction. My Lord's hands are not bound : Aggarwal

My Lord is here to do justice.. the powers my lord can search: Aggarwal

We have travelled some miles on the signing. There is a revision filed in Maran's case and it says "settled" my Mr Anand Grover: Aggarwal

By**

Appeal is continuation of trial. There has to be sanction for appeal. It is for them to file an show whatever documents..: Aggarwal

Court should not for a minute think that I'm saying, though I am entitled to, that case should not proceed without deciding these issues. I will not stop my arguements. But these documents have to come formally: Aggarwal

If we are right, the exercise that they want to do is not fair. Once a jurisdictional issue arises, to say that the court may not decide it is contrary to law: Luthra

Luthra reads a judgement on jurisdictional fact.

A document will show weather the requirements of law under Sec 378 CrPCwere met: Luthra

Luthra continues to read the judgment.

Luthra reads Express Newspapers judgment.

We are raising the question of absence of authority to act.. it becomes imperative that we are able to respond to the documents shown by Mr Jain: Luthra

There is deficiency as far as documentation is concerned. Sec 24(8) talks about appointment of PP in class of cases. SC has decided that 2G matters will be a class of cases and SPP was appointed. Once SPP was appointed.. notification will supercede everything else: Hariharan

Mr Bhandari's appointment is superceded by the Notification on appointment of SPP for 2G cases ane appeals: N Hariharan

Deficiencies need to be fulfilled first : Hariharan

Merely because the application contains a prayer, it does not bind the court to grant it as a whole or even issue notice : Jain

The purpose for which it was filed has been achieved. My Lord has seen the document. Nothing remains in the application: Jain

Court is not obligated to address each and every segment of the prayer: Jain

He says documents are deficient. The court at this point of time is not exercising jurisdiction of writ court. It is not Art 226. They cannot ask the court to exercise judicial review over decisions of Centre and process of filing: Jain

Sanjeev Bhandari's power is being questioned. Neither Mr Mehta nor I have power to appear in any other case but Mr Bhandari has power to appear in all CBI cases. Mr Bhandari's powers are unfettered when it comes to filing documents on behalf of CBI: Jain

My argument should not be construed to mean that the SG and ASG would not be allowed to represent CBI in any matter without a notification. I'm only juxtaposing the two notifications: Jain

There is not need to file any reply. I don't wish to file any reply: Jain

Any other document is not required. My appointment and Mr Mehta's appointment is not an issue at this stage. I'm saying the entire file is not required to be shown: Jain

Jain reiterates P&H HC decision.

The decision to file an appeal is executive decision and was conveyed to the CBI. I don't have to give the file noting. If he has a problem with the decision making process.. the appropriate remedy is a writ court. They may seek whatever document they want through RTI: Jain

Present matter is appellate jurisdiction. The jurisdictional issue is whether an appeal would lie or not.. whether leave can be granted or not: Jain

The court had decided to hear the jurisdictional issue only.. whether leave to appeal is to be granted or not.. that is the fact on issue: Jain

A completely non productive hearing which is beyond the jurisdiction of this court : Jain

It is a matter of internal arrangment.. if SPP is appointed for this case, it doesn't mean that others PPs can't appear: Jain

After SC order in which it was made clear that appointment of SPP by SC was relevant only till trial. Now it is for the government to appoint. If Mr Mehta had not been appointed, any of the PPs could have appeared: Jain.

A lot of seniors are not comfortable with writing their names under "settled by".. it is not mandatory: Jain

Mr Mehta was not obligated to file the appeal.. he may have seen the appeal but I don't have to place all these documents: Jain.

There are certain legal issues such as jurisdictional facts.. a statement with relation of documents.. oral statement can't be accepted: Luthra

Not saying that every senior advocate has to follow this discretion and may be able to defend himself/herself before the BCI. Mr Mehta exercised the discretion and got the appeal filed through someone else: Jain

I don't wish to enlarge the scope of the application: Jain

The deficiency would be if I fail to produce the document.. relevancy of the document has to be seen from the perspective of the court: Jain

The court may ask them that in how many cases has CBI field the direction and permission to file an appeal. It is not filed: Jain

In my career of 38 years, I have not seen : Court

Mr Bhandari was not appointed for 2G cases because he was never appointed by the Surpreme Court: Luthra

There is no point in relying on the notification on Mr Bhandari : Luthra

I've never made the statement that Mr Bhandari was appointed for 2G: Jain

That's why we needs written reply : Luthra

Mr Bhandari's appointment as SPP was independent of 2G, it was not limited to 2G. His appointment was for CBI cases. I'm not saying that he was appointment for trial of 2G cases : Jain

It is nobody's case that State government gave direction to CBI or that there was no direction to CBI. Nothing remains in this application: Jain

Documents were shared to satisfy the conscience of the court: Jain

At this time, the only jurisdictional issue is leave to appeal: Jain

I've complied with the requirement of section 378 CrPC: Jain

Aggarwal asserts that documents must be brought on record by filing them.

The point is that when the root is bad, nothing can survive: Luthra

Luthra reads a judgement.

Our case is that the foundation of the appeal is bad.. there is an oral admission that Bhandari was not appointed for 2G case.. Bhandari's appointment has nothing to do with 2G case: Luthra

Even after Mr Grover was appointed, arguements could not begin because his notification had not come : Luthra

Requirement is of Sec 24 coupled with 2G.. till we don't have the documents, how can be determine whether we are covered by P&H HC: Luthra

Today they are producing notifications for themselves for 2G but not Mr Bhandari : Luthra

Let's hear Mr Hariharan: Court

Can we continue tomorrow?: Hariharan

Court proceeds to adjourn the hearing.

Hearing to continue tomorrow.

Read the account of today's proceedings here:

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…