New Delhi: Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud Thursday clarified that the bail application of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain was assigned to a bench led by Justice Bela Trivedi because Justice A.S. Bopanna was not available due to health reasons.
The response came after Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi raised an objection before the Chief Justice of India regarding the listing of Jain’s bail petition before a bench led by Justice Bela Trivedi.
The case had been partly heard by a two-judge bench comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Trivedi.
However, earlier this month, the matter was listed before a bench comprising Justices Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma.
Refusing to interfere with the bench combination, CJI Chandrachud said: “I will not control what the judge is doing in the matter listed before her. The matter is listed before the judge. The judge will take a call on it. I cannot.”
Post lunch, the CJI referred to a communication from the office of Justice Bopanna, explaining that due to medical reasons, he hadn’t resumed duties after the Diwali vacations, and had said that part-heard matters may be released from his bench. Therefore, this matter was assigned to Justice Trivedi who had last heard the matter, he added.
“The reason why Justice Trivedi has to hear the matter is because there is an application for an extension of interim bail…I thought I’ll clarify it…find it surprising for any member of the bar to say that I want this particular judge,” the CJI added.
The listing of cases before different benches has led to a controversy over the past month.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court extended the interim bail granted to Jain till the next date of hearing on 11 December.
The court had granted Jain six weeks’ interim bail on 26 May, on medical grounds, in the money laundering case against him. This interim order has been extended from time to time, while the court is hearing his appeal challenging the Delhi High Court’s refusal to grant him bail.
Representing Jain, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi had raised similar concerns earlier this month and told the new bench that Justice Bopanna’s bench had already heard the matter for two hours, and urged the court to list the case in January, once Justice Bopanna is back.
However, in response, Justice Trivedi remarked that the “interim order cannot continue for that long”.
In response, Singhvi was quoted as saying by Live Law: “The learned judge who is presiding over this in a bench constituted by the Chief Justice is not sitting owing to illness. The matter has also been heard in part, at length. We have been told he will sit in January. If the bench that is hearing the matter is not sitting, the interim order cannot be touched.”
Justice Trivedi then directed the hearing to be deferred to get more clarity, while extending Jain’s interim bail. Hearing the case on Thursday, Justice Trivedi and Sharma extended Jain’s interim bail till 8 January.
Earlier this month, senior advocate Dushyant Dave had also expressed “deep anguish” over the listing of certain cases by the Supreme Court registry, in an open letter to the Chief Justice of India.
In disregard of the rules and established practice, Dave wrote in the letter, cases heard by senior judges were being moved to benches of juniors despite the former being available to continue the hearings.
(Edited by Amrtansh Arora)