SC raps HP govt for bringing up judge’s wife
Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com
New Delhi:09.08.2018
In an unusual development on Wednesday, during hearing of a case relating to encroachments in Himachal Pradesh, the state’s counsel invited the Supreme Court’s ire when he pointed out that a PIL on a similar issue filed by the wife of one of the judges on the bench is pending in the high court.
The court was hearing a suo motu criminal contempt case relating to an official being shot dead while leading an anti-encroachment drive in Kasauli when the state’s counsel Abhinav Mukerji informed a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur, Abdul S Nazeer and Deepak Gupta informing that a writ petition filed by Punam Gupta, wife of Justice Gupta, on encroachments in forest land was pending in the Himachal Pradesh HC.
Justice Lokur asked why the state government was raising this issue and whether it had nothing better to do? He then asked Mukerji whether he had gone through the pending PIL, to which the counsel replied in the negative. Justice Lokur said it was shocking that the state government had to take this stand before the court when it would do well to concentrate on governance. The bench told Mukerji that he as a lawyer was officer of the court first and should not become the mouthpiece of the state government.
Dhananjay.Mahapatra@timesgroup.com
New Delhi:09.08.2018
In an unusual development on Wednesday, during hearing of a case relating to encroachments in Himachal Pradesh, the state’s counsel invited the Supreme Court’s ire when he pointed out that a PIL on a similar issue filed by the wife of one of the judges on the bench is pending in the high court.
The court was hearing a suo motu criminal contempt case relating to an official being shot dead while leading an anti-encroachment drive in Kasauli when the state’s counsel Abhinav Mukerji informed a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur, Abdul S Nazeer and Deepak Gupta informing that a writ petition filed by Punam Gupta, wife of Justice Gupta, on encroachments in forest land was pending in the Himachal Pradesh HC.
Justice Lokur asked why the state government was raising this issue and whether it had nothing better to do? He then asked Mukerji whether he had gone through the pending PIL, to which the counsel replied in the negative. Justice Lokur said it was shocking that the state government had to take this stand before the court when it would do well to concentrate on governance. The bench told Mukerji that he as a lawyer was officer of the court first and should not become the mouthpiece of the state government.
No comments:
Post a Comment