On Monday, the mystic situation presiding in Andhra Pradesh over the alleged attempts to destabalize the judiciary took another turn as Supreme Court asked Retd. Andhra Pradesh High Court Judge, Justice V. Eswaraiah to file an affidavit admitting that he did indulge in the infamous 'private phone conversation' with a suspended District Munsif Magistrate into which the investigation is going on.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court after alleged claims of the phone call resulting in some "serious conspiracy" against the High Court Chief Justice and a Senior sitting Judge of the Supreme Court, issued investigation into the matter with Retd. Supreme Court Judge, Justice RV Raveendran monitoring the same.
Aggrieved by the Court's action, Justice (Retd.) V. Eswaraiah approached Top Court against it.
Arguements in Supreme Court- Bench Headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, while appearing for the petitioner submitted, "This is an astonishing order of the High Court. Please look at the sequence of events – on 11th July, a petition was moved in the High Court on behalf of a backward classes body that the Covid guidelines are not being followed in the High Court. The judgement was reserved on 31st July. Subsequently, on 4 August, an intervention application came to be filed by a suspended district magistrate that a conversation had taken place between himself and the present petitioner on 20th July. The conversation was also filed and it was also subsequently leaked to the media. The High Court then ordered enquiry into the conversation because it allegedly relates to a controversy involving a sitting Supreme Court judge and the Chief Justice of the High Court"
He further asserted:
"How can a private conversation be enquired into by the High Court? I fail to see what crime has been committed even if the conversation revolves around some misconduct by the Supreme Court judge and the High Court Chief Justice? There was no notice to me! My impleadmeant application was not allowed! And an enquiry has been ordered? This is out of order! I request for a notice on my petition and for a stay on the enquiry."
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for an intervener, advanced, "Please issue notice. There is nothing private about this conversation. What is a private conversation?" to which Mr. Bhushan recoiled that it a conversation between two people and thus is 'private'
On this juncture, Mr Sibal persisted, "It is a motivated attack on the system! Your Lordships have to hear this fully. If the conversation is motivated by something, it needs to be enquired if the conversation had happened. Then Your Lordships will see what the motivation was"
At this event, upon observing the arguments, Justice Ashok Bhushan asked the petitoner's Counsel, Mr. Bhushan whether his client indulged in the conversation or not? , replying to which Mr. Bhushan said, "Yes, the conversation took place. We have filed the correct transcript of it because the one annexed before the High Court was wrong"
Justice Bhushan thus after the reply noted:
"If you admit that then no enquiry is needed. It is not a crime to discuss (an issue)."
He further ordered:
"Give an affidavit stating that the conversation was entered into by the petitioner and that the correct transcript has been filed. We will dismiss the petition and close the enquiry"
Noting that the transcript of the talk between the petitioner and suspended District Munsif Magistrate, Mr. S. Ramakrishna is filed, the bench granted time until next Monday for the said affidavit to also be brought on record.
Denying to issue any Notice or Intervener, the Bench stated that it shall pass 'appropriate orders' once the afforsaid is carried out.
The order has been passed by a Bench comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Justice R. Subhash Reddy and Justice M.R. Shah on 11-01-2021.
Read Order Here:
Share this Document :Picture Source :
