Uploading Burnt Cash Video Doesnt Mean Process Is Vitiated: Top Court To Justice Verma
The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed with Justice Yashwant Varma's submission that the video of burnt wads of currency notes found at his residence should not have been uploaded on the apex court website.
However, a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih said just because tapes have been published on the website, it does not mean the process is vitiated and Justice Varma can go "scot-free".
The top court said the impeachment proceedings will be held independently in the Parliament, without reference to the in-house report.
On the question of delay in approaching the top court, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, arguing for Justice Varma, said a tape was released on the SC website and the judge's reputation was already damaged.
"Tape was released. It was already released, my reputation already damaged. What would I come to court for?" Sibal said.
Justice Datta remarked, "We are with you on this for the time being. It should not have been done." However, Justice Datta said, "It does not mean that there has been some lapse in the procedure, which affects the powers of the Parliament to take action against you, because Parliament, I need not to say with any emphasis, it has its own powers.
"Parliament is not supposed to be guided by what judiciary says or what CJI recommends. They are supposed to act independently and if, at all, Parliament admits the motion and if an inquiry committee is set up, you know who can be the members of the committee.
"Do you think those members, people of high calibre, would be influenced by preliminary report where you will have whole opportunity to demolish what are the findings," he said.
The top court was hearing Justice Varma's plea seeking invalidation of a report by an in-house inquiry panel which found him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery matter. The in-house inquiry panel report indicted Justice Varma over the discovery of a huge cache of burnt cash from his official residence during his tenure as a Delhi High Court judge.
In an unprecedented move, the top court on Mach 22 uploaded on its website an in-house inquiry report, including photos and videos, into the discovery of a huge stash of cash at the residence of Justice Varma who was then Delhi High Court judge.
The report contains photos and videos of the cash discovered at a storeroom at Justice Varma's house during a firefighting operation on the night of Holi, March 14.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
a few seconds ago
- Hindustan Times
Are Rohingya people in India refugees or illegal migrants? Supreme Court to decide
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will examine whether Rohingyas staying in the country were refugees or illegal migrants before going ahead with hearing a batch of petitions filed on their behalf challenging their deportation and seeking basic amenities during their stay in refugee camps. IA Rohingya woman holds her baby boy's hand at a refugee camp in Bangladesh. (AP FILE/REPRESENTATIVE IMAGE) 'The first major issue is whether they are refugees or illegal migrants. Rest is consequential,' a bench of justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and N Kotiswar Singh said. 'If they are refugees, they are entitled to certain protections under law. If not, they are illegal migrants and should be deported back to their country.' The four questions framed by the court in the Rohingya batch of cases included, 'whether Rohingya entrants are entitled to be declared as refugees and if so, what protection emanates from the rights they are entitled to; whether Rohingyas are illegal entrants and if government of India and states are obligated to deport them in accordance with law.' There were two consequential issues also that were framed by the court. These were: 'Even if Rohingya entrants are held to be illegal entrants, can they be detained indefinitely or they are entitled to be released on bail subject to conditions.' Lastly, it said, 'Whether Rohingya entrants who are not detained but living in refugee camps have been provided with basic amenities like drinking water, sanitation, education, etc.' The court had taken up 22 cases involving the deportation of Rohingya who were either in detention camps or claimed refugee status. Among these, the bench sought to segregate cases related to Rohingya migrants as a single batch. The other cases involving other foreigners were directed to be grouped into a separate batch to be handled separately. As the batch of cases got listed together, the bench expressed a practical difficulty in proceeding with the hearing, as some petitions spoke about the deportation of foreigners in general, while others specifically related to the condition of foreigners in detention camps. Advocate Kanu Agarwal, appearing for the central government, submitted a list of cases pertaining to Rohingya people and urged the court to decide this batch of cases first. The non-Rohingya matters, he added, seek interpretation of the Foreigners Act. The bench agreed, saying, 'The issues that arise in the other batch of cases will be determined separately on another date.' Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who was appearing in multiple petitions, said that the genesis of these cases began with cases filed by Rohingya people in 2013. He said 15 out of the batch of 22 cases pertained to Rohingya refugees and the need to provide them facilities in their camps on par with refugees recognised under the UN Convention on Refugees. India is not a signatory to this convention and has not considered granting refugee status to them. Senior advocates Ashwani Kumar and Colin Gonsalves, appearing in other matters, pointed out that the Rohingya people who hail from Myanmar have fled to India seeking asylum as they were being persecuted in their country. Gonsalves further referred to a case filed by the wife of a foreigner facing detention in Assam which concern Rohingya and non-Rohingya foreigners. In that case, Gonsalves showed orders passed by the court to expedite the deportation process despite the fact that Myanmar was unwilling to take these persons back. In May this year, while hearing an application filed by Rohingya people in Delhi, the top court refused to adopt a piecemeal approach in deciding individual cases and called for all cases pending on the issue to be listed together. The Centre has been opposing the maintainability of these petitions, citing the Supreme Court's order passed in April 2021. This order permits the Centre to take deportation measures as required under law and held that while the right to life and liberty is available to even non-citizens, the right not to be deported is ancillary but concomitant to the right to reside or settle in any part of India, which is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(e) only to citizens.
Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
Highway widening: Ensure display of excavation permit details, Kerala HC tells NHAI
Kochi: High court has directed the NHAI to install metallic boards at regular intervals along the stretch of highway under construction where quarrying activities are being carried out. The directive, issued under the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2015, also stipulates that the boards must display the name and address of the permit holder, details of permit, quantity of extraction permitted, area of extraction and types of explosives used. Additionally, each board must include the contact information of the NHAI officer in charge of the project for emergency use by local residents. The bench of Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Basant Balaji issued the order while considering a PIL by P Pradeep Kumar of Chelannur panchayat in Kozhikode and 24 other local residents. They alleged that, in connection with the highway widening works between Kasaragod and Thiruvananthapuram, soil was being extracted beyond permissible limits in their area, altering the hill's topography and causing severe environmental damage, including a heightened risk of landslides. They contended that the excavation affected an area inhabited by more than 100 residents, with schools and temples nearby, and had also led to pollution of a nearby river. The petitioners sought a directive to immediately halt the unscientific and excessive excavation of soil and to implement appropriate safety measures, including slope stabilisation, to prevent further harm. It was also pointed out that when hill cutting or excavation is carried out on slopes, residents have no designated authority to contact in case of emergencies. During a hearing held in Feb, the Kozhikode district collector submitted that necessary steps were being taken to ensure that quarrying activities remained within permissible limits and were carried out scientifically. Regarding the concern about the absence of an emergency contact point for local residents, it was suggested that metallic boards with such details be placed at the sites. Accordingly, HC issued the directive, and the NHAI assured it that necessary instructions would be issued to the concessionaire to install the boards.
Hindustan Times
32 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
The law of driving on Indian roads
India has the highest absolute number of road accident fatalities in the world; this moderates somewhat when seen per capita, but remains a significantly high figure — higher than, say, China, which has a comparable population but higher vehicle density. Road accident deaths are also easily preventable. So, the Supreme Court's observation that sudden and unannounced braking is negligence, particularly if it endangers others, could be read as a response to the high human toll. The Supreme Court's observation that sudden and unannounced braking is negligence, particularly if it endangers others, could be read as a response to the high human toll. (Hindustan Times) However, if the observation, made in a compensation order becomes the basis for wider application, it is likely to come up against the practical difficulties of driving on Indian roads, where one can spot the entire historical trajectory of man's engagement with motion in a single reel — starting with pedestrians, handcarts, bullock cards, bicycles, autos, cars, buses and trucks, many often driving on the wrong lane or in the wrong direction. Speeding, tailgating, jaywalking, lane-changing without signalling, and a raft of other traffic infractions are all too common — as is dereliction of personal safety conduct. Add to this animals straying onto the roads and potholes and craters, and sudden braking becomes both an unavoidable hazard of and survival tactic for driving on Indian roads. It will be no minor challenge to penalise sudden breaking, that is, if the apex court's observation becomes the law. The way forward is to crack down on infractions that prompt sudden braking. Severe penal action is the only way to enforce road rules, and no authority should be spared from action, including when they fail to maintain roads in conditions suitable for safe driving and walking. But such action must also factor in the ground realities.
