Justice UU Lalit recuses from hearing plea against Andhra CM over allegations against SC judge

South India

Justice Lalit recused from the case saying that he had representedd some of the parties in the litigation 

Supreme Court judge, Justice UU Lalit, on Monday, recused from hearing a plea seeking action against Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister, YS Jaganmohan Reddy for raising allegations against Supreme Court judge, Justice NV Ramana, reported Bar & Bench.

When the plea came up before a Bench which also comprised Justices Vineet Saran and Ravindra Bhat, Justice Lalit said that he could not take up the case as he had represented some of the parties in litigation. The Bench then recorded a short order, requesting Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde to list the case before an appropriate Bench.

The court was hearing three separate petitions seeking inquiry and action against the Chief Minister for his ‘scandalizing’ remarks against the second senior-most judge of the Supreme Court, Justice NV Ramana.

The petitioners, who are three advocates GS Mani, Pradeep Kumar Yadav and Sunil Kumar Singh and NGO Anti-Corruption Council of India Trust have submitted that the allegations levelled by Reddy against Justice Ramana are baseless. They have also highlighted that Reddy is facing over 20 criminal cases.

Petitioners have sought a judicial inquiry by an internal committee headed by sitting or retired judges of the Supreme Court or any authority including the Central Bureau of Investigation, into the allegations raised by the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister.

Advocate Sunil Kumar Singh, in his petition, has asked the top court to issue a show cause to Reddy after his government's official made public a letter written by Reddy to the Chief Justice of India, SA Bobde on October 6 making certain allegations against Justice Ramana.

Reddy, in his letter, had alleged that Justice Ramana had been influencing the judicial affairs at Andhra Pradesh High Court including calling the shots on roster of certain High Court judges. It was also alleged that cases important to the opposition Telugu Desam Party were “allocated to a few judges”.

Attorney General KK Venugopal had earlier refused to reconsider his decision to grant consent for contempt proceedings against the chief minister and his principal advisor Ajeya Kallam who had made the contentious letter to CJI public for making allegations against judges.

The attorney general had said that the CJI was aware of the matter and it would be, therefore, inappropriate for him to give consent and “preclude the determination of the Chief Justice of India on the matter”.

All Comments