scorecardresearch
Tuesday, March 19, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeJudiciarySC allows Salve to recuse as amicus for Covid matters, raps lawyers...

SC allows Salve to recuse as amicus for Covid matters, raps lawyers for ‘imputing motives’

SC bench led by CJI Bobde took a grim view of the criticism its earlier order faced for interfering with high courts and said it will not transfer pending cases to itself.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Friday allowed senior advocate Harish Salve to recuse himself as the amicus curiae in the suo motu proceedings on Covid-19 management in the country.

Salve, who was asked to assist the court by a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde Thursday, told the bench that he was not inclined to continue in wake of the “language of narrative” that began post his appointment.

“It is the most sensitive case this court will look into. I don’t want this case to be decided under a shadow that I knew CJI from school and college and allegations being made or there is conflict of interest,” said Salve.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognisance of issues related to Covid-19 management in India, including oxygen and vaccination shortage. In the order, it had also said various high court orders on the pandemic were creating “some confusion and diversion”, which led to widespread outrage.

In the hearing Friday, the SC bench, also comprising Justices L.N. Rao and Ravindra S. Bhatt, also took a grim view of the criticism the earlier order had sparked. It said certain motives were imputed to the bench by senior lawyers without even reading the judgment.

The three judges felt the remarks against the top court for interfering with high courts that had already taken cognisance of the situation in respective states were unwarranted.

The bench has adjourned the matter to 27 April following Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s request for time to file submissions on the Centre’s behalf.


Also read: India records over 3.32 lakh new Covid cases, 2,263 deaths in 24 hours


‘Salve’s appointment case of conflict’

The bench had asked Salve to assist the court Thursday after putting the Centre on notice and stating that it will look into various issues related to the devastating second wave of the pandemic. This includes looking into the supply of oxygen, supply of essential drugs, method and manner of vaccination and the need for empowering the state government to declare lockdowns.

However, questions were raised over the bench’s choice to have Salve assist the court in the matter.

In an application filed before the court, activist Saket Gokhale claimed Salve did not meet the “basic conditions required in the present matter to perform the role of an amicus in an efficient manner and assist the court in effective discharge of justice”. Gokhale noted that an amicus is someone who is an independent lawyer and in no way connected to the case, which was not the case with Salve.

In a tweet, senior advocate Ravindra Srivastava said: “It is appalling to see the constitutional office of the Attorney General being undermined. Supreme Court chooses an amicus over the AG to seek assistance. Notice to AG should have gone.”

The decision to appoint Salve as amicus curiae came while the court was hearing an application filed by Vedanta, seeking permission to reopen its plant only for the purpose of producing oxygen for supply of medical oxygen to Covid-19 patients. Salve was appearing for Vedanta in the hearing, whose plant in Tamil Nadu had been shut down due to environmental concerns.

Salve has also represented Serum Institute of India in a separate case earlier.

Even before the bench could begin its hearing in the matter, Salve sought his recusal and mentioned the reservations expressed over his appointment.

“I did not know our bar is divided among industries we appear for. Please allow me to recuse with all humility. I appeared for Vedanta since was informed 10 minutes before mentioning,” he said.

While the bench asserted that it was a collective decision by the judges, it said it would “honour” his sentiments after Salve clarified that he did not want to remain associated with the matter anymore.


Also read: Day after halting supply, cops now stationed at Panipat oxygen plant to ensure no disruptions


‘No intention to transfer the case’

In its order Thursday, the SC bench had hinted that it might withdraw some of the cases on the matter from the high courts and take them up instead.

However, during the latest hearing, Justice Rao clarified that the SC had no intention to do so.

The judge then asked senior advocate Dushyant Dave, who had appeared on behalf of the Gujarat High Court Bar Association, why he was imputing motives to the bench without reading the order. At this, Dave replied that the whole country had thought the court would transfer the matters.

“We love my lords. But it was a genuine perception because my lords have done it in the past,” Dave said.

In reply, Justice Bhat said: “We never said a word and did not stop the high court. We asked the Centre to go to HC and report to them. What kind of perception you are talking about? Talk about these proceedings.”

The bench told Dave that it expected him to protect the institution, to which the senior lawyer responded by saying: “The institution will remain protected with objective criticism.”

The court then concluded the hearing abruptly, as it sensed the arguments were proceeding towards a heated exchange between the lawyers.


Also read: Happy hypoxia, diarrhoea, severe infection: How 2nd Covid wave is affecting young patients


Tamil Nadu to respond if it can operate Vedanta plant

Meanwhile, in the matter related to re-opening of Vedanta Limited’s plant, the bench took exception to the Tamil Nadu government’s stand that the same cannot be allowed.

The bench said if Vedanta cannot be allowed to run, the Tamil Nadu government should take over and run the plant to enable oxygen production to meet the acute shortage created by the Covid-19 crisis.

Senior advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan, appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, agreed to seek instructions on this point and reply on 26 April.

Vaidyanathan said the plant’s re-opening could be a potential law and order problem. “I don’t want a repeat of 2018 incident,” he said, referring to the police firing that caused the death of some protestors outside the Vedanta’s Tuticorin Copper Smelter.

“Why don’t you fulfill your responsibility in manufacturing oxygen? Just because you have a problem with Vedanta you will not manufacture oxygen? What kind of argument is this? We are not interested whether Vedanta or A, B, or C runs it. We are interested in ensuring Oxygen is produced. It is not a question of Vedanta. People are dying. You (State) can produce Oxygen,” the court said, giving the state government the time it requested to reply.

The central government has already supported Vedanta’s application for re-opening but strictly for the purposes of producing oxygen.


Also read: ‘Double mutant, triple mutant, Bengal lineage’ — Covid variants driving India surge decoded


 

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

3 COMMENTS

  1. Dushyant Dave is a Prashant Bhushan in the making. The SC would do well to cut his wings off before he does turn into an eternal nuisance.

  2. Not a happy note on which to end an unremarkable tenure. Fine, forensic analysis by Shri Prashant Bhushan in a column for The Hindu.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular