Thread by @LawBeatInd

🚨Teesta Setalvad’s bail plea in Supreme Court —-
Setalvad has been accused of manipulating evidence to frame innocent people in the riots that engulfed Gujarat post the Godhra Carnage in 2002.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal: Complaint was made that there is a larger conspiracy and an SIT was set up. SIT was also to look into Zakia's complaint. Court then made an order that if someone needs to be prosecuted then you go to an appropriate court. ...(contd.)

Sibal: 26000 pages of docs were filed and then we filed out protest petition which was rejected in the high court. We came to Supreme Court & it was rejected (Sibal is referring to Zakia Jafri judgment by Supreme Court which was released recently)

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta: I have a preliminary objection to the maintainability of Teesta Setalvad bail plea of directly approaching SC when the remedy of petitioner is still pending before High Court (of Gujarat).

#CJI: They have challenged both orders.

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta: Setalvad has come before SC via "doctrine of election". Having chosen a remedy of S. 439 under trial court, it was rejected, the remedy would have been to challenge it.

Sibal: I am saying the FIR should never have been filed. Only one cognisable offence out of all of them stipulated. The SIT filed all documents before Magistrate & FIR was filed instead of challenging before magistrate, the contents of which were never disclosed to us.

Sibal for Teesta Setalvad: The FIR says that it has been filed basis the Supreme Court judgment in Zakia Jafri and no documents filed. It says for "finding out behind the scenes conspiracy".. you file an FIR for finding out behind the scene conspiracy!

#CJI: See CRPC (criminal procedure code) provisions.
Sibal for Setalvad: Kindly come to section 195 of crpc. It starts with "No court shall take cognisance... for criminal conspiracy...".
read section here: indiankanoon.org/doc/621703/

Sibal now reading section 193, 194 of the Criminal procedure code

Sibal: They quote the Supreme Court judgment and filed and FIR. All documents were filed by the SIT.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta: Why not take these up before the High Court (vol. of Gujarat where plea already pending)?

#CJI: What kind of offence ?
SG Mehta: State would NOT like to give special treatment to any accused.
#CJI: The state is not doing that. The court has to be alive to that. We are considering this in our appellate jurisdiction. No doubt, you are right it is pending in HC.

#CJI: She (Setalvad) has benign custody since two months..
SG Tushar Mehta: We haven't done so out of pleasure. There is enough to substantiate this.
#CJI: We are not saying that.

#CJI: Lady (Teesta Setalvad) has completed more than 2 months of custody, there must have been custodial interrogation, is there anything to corroborate from that?

#CJI in Teesta Setalvad bail plea: Under s. 437 of criminal procedure code mandate, a lady is entitled to favoured treatment.

SG Tushar Mehta: Would a normal person be allowed to Supreme Court under 136 if the remedy was pending in High Court? 1000's of people in the same situation. NO SPECIAL TREATMENT to be given to petitioner (vol. Teesta Setalvad). State would be failing its duty if not brought out

SG Tushar Mehta: I would not be able to oppose any other accused if petitioner is given special treatment here. State would not be able to oppose!

SG Tushar Mehta: I am only saying I am a prosecutor and I will not be able to give out smiles in the middle of the hearing like the others here. I will do my duty.

SG Tushar Mehta: There is no dispute that riots broke out in 2002. Complaints filed at behest of petitioner maligning many innocents. One community attacks the society at Gulbarg. The state says "appoint an SIT, we have nothing to hide".

SG: SC appoints even member. All 9 cases were to be investigated by the SC appointed SIT. After 4 years of the riots being taken place, a complaint is filed in the name of one widow who unfortunately lost her husband, namely Zakia Jafri, naming every person including the then CM.

Sibal interjects, says that Solicitor General is on merits and that he was on a preliminary submission.

SG Mehta continues: Petitioner now joins Mrs. Jafri before Supreme Court making wild allegations against SIT.

SG: Petitioner has approached the trial court, wherein the court hears it for 2.5 days. The trial court rejects her plea. Thereafter matter could have been different if Teesta Setalvad had approached SC against This sessions order.

SG Tushar Mehta: She ELECTS the remedy of going to high court instead (vol. Teesta Setalvad challenged the rejection of bail order before HC). Question here is in a CB Judgment which stipulates whether your lordship may still look into this litigious chain.

SG Tushar Mehta reads a constitution bench judgment to substantiate that Supreme Court should not be hearing Teesta Setalvad's bail plea under law as she has already approached Gujarat HC challenging the sessions court order rejecting it.

SG Tushar Mehta: "There is significance of finality of high court in bail matters? The apex court must only interfere in questions of substantial question of law..." reads a judgment.. "the apex court must not keep its eyes too wide open"

SG Tushar Mehta: Here is a case where the Apex Court does not even have the benefit of the HC's mind. She (vol. Teesta Setalvad) rushed to the Supreme Court while she elected to go to High Court first.

SG Tushar Mehta opposing Teesta Setalvad's plea in Supreme Court on preliminary ground of doctrine of election (Bail plea pending in HC): "Before Your Lordships, everyone is equal".

SG Tushar Mehta continues to cite judgments to substantiate his preliminary objection to Teesta Setalvad's bail plea.

He now seeks an adjournment.
Sibal vehemently opposes this, says this is being done deliberately.
SG Tushar Mehta clarifies not deliberate, the Court posted it for today, "need to clarify this accusation, state filed reply and notice was issued" he adds.

#CJI: We have not understood what the case is about?
Do you accept that as a matter of principle the petitioner could have approached SC directly before coming to HC?
SG Mehta: In extraordinary circumstances, maybe it can be done.
#CJI: So it is not an impossibility.

SG Tushar Mehta: That is an academic question.

#CJI: What struck us is that your complaint does not stipulate more than what Supreme Court said. The author of complaint does not have anything greater than that.

#CJI: Within 1 day of Supreme Court judgment, complaint comes to be filed. Secondly, as investigators, you also had advantage of subjecting this lady to custodial interrogation. The offences stipulated are not pertaining to murder or anything like that but viz. forgery.

#CJI: The petitioner is a lady, if the high court is not cognisant of this and makes it returnable after 6 weeks, should we not interfere?
SG Tushar Mehta: They may do so, it can be returnable earlier in High Court.

#CJI: Suppose we grant Interim Bail to Teesta Setalvad and let HC decide it on September 19?

SG Tushar Mehta: Then I will oppose it. The offences here are much greater than those or murder or other "Serious offences". My Lords may at least hear me.

SG Tushar Mehta: There are large number of accused who are given such dates but all accused are not that powerful. As a state, I want your lordships to examine that. #TeestaSetalvad #SupremeCourt

#CJI says it will not be possible to hear tomorrow as same combination of judges not sitting tomorrow.
SG Tushar Mehta says he cannot give up his case just because petitioners are insisting.

SG Tushar Mehta: I don't think I'm being unreasonable.

#CJI: List it for 2 o clock tomorrow. Give us instances where in similar situations where a lady has been in custody for this long and HC has made it returnable after 6 weeks.

SG Tushar Mehta: In my knowledge, no lady has been accused of such offences. I will not come in the way if your lordship feels she's a lady ....
#TeestaSetalvad #SupremeCourt

#CJI: Is this a standard practice (of bail hearings adjourned by HC by 6 weeks in case of accused being lady)?
Sibal: No No it is not.
SG: I am not here to fight.
Bench puts up case for 2 pm tomorrow. #TeestaSetalvad