SC disapproves of HC judge ‘copy-paste job’
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi:06.09.2019
Responding to P Chidambaram’s allegation that the high court judge did a copy-paste job by relying blindly on an “unsubstantiated” note handed over by CBI/ED after the hearing had concluded, the Supreme Court on Thursday disapproved verbatim quoting of the sealed envelope note in the judgment.
A bench of Justices R Banumathi and A S Bopanna said there was nothing wrong on the part of the judge to go through the sealed envelope report but said, “We do not endorse the approach of the single judge in extracting the note produced by the Enforcement Directorate. “Of course, while considering the request for anticipatory bail and while perusing the material/note produced by ED/CBI, the single judge could have satisfied his conscience to hold that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. On the other hand, the single judge has verbatim quoted from the note produced by ED. The single judge was not right in extracting the note produced by ED/CBI which in our view, is not a correct approach for consideration of grant/ refusal of anticipatory bail.”
The bench further said, “But such incorrect approach of the single judge, in our view, does not affect the correctness of the conclusion in refusing to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant in view of all other aspects considered herein. Though we do not endorse the approach of the single judge in extracting the note produced by the Enforcement Directorate, we do not find any ground warranting interference with the impugned order.”
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
New Delhi:06.09.2019
Responding to P Chidambaram’s allegation that the high court judge did a copy-paste job by relying blindly on an “unsubstantiated” note handed over by CBI/ED after the hearing had concluded, the Supreme Court on Thursday disapproved verbatim quoting of the sealed envelope note in the judgment.
A bench of Justices R Banumathi and A S Bopanna said there was nothing wrong on the part of the judge to go through the sealed envelope report but said, “We do not endorse the approach of the single judge in extracting the note produced by the Enforcement Directorate. “Of course, while considering the request for anticipatory bail and while perusing the material/note produced by ED/CBI, the single judge could have satisfied his conscience to hold that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. On the other hand, the single judge has verbatim quoted from the note produced by ED. The single judge was not right in extracting the note produced by ED/CBI which in our view, is not a correct approach for consideration of grant/ refusal of anticipatory bail.”
The bench further said, “But such incorrect approach of the single judge, in our view, does not affect the correctness of the conclusion in refusing to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant in view of all other aspects considered herein. Though we do not endorse the approach of the single judge in extracting the note produced by the Enforcement Directorate, we do not find any ground warranting interference with the impugned order.”
No comments:
Post a Comment