Supreme Court refuses to entertain pleas seeking probe against A.P. CM

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain petitions seeking judicial inquiry or CBI probe against Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy for the circumstances main to the discharge of his letter addressed to Chief Justice of India levelling allegations against a sitting Supreme Court decide and State High Court judges.

The courtroom additionally declined a plea by one of many petitioners to difficulty a writ of quo warranto against Mr. Reddy for releasing the ‘confidential’ letter to the general public and thus “misusing his office”.

Besides, the Bench led by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul famous that it didn’t need any “multiplicity of litigation”. Justice Kaul stated one other Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan is already analyzing an enchantment filed by the Andhra Pradesh authorities in a linked difficulty. This enchantment, filed earlier than Justice Bhushan, considerations a September 16 order of the High Court, staying the investigation into the “illegal purchase” of land in Amaravati.

The High Court had additionally barred the State from taking any coercive motion against the individuals named within the FIR, which incorporates family members of the Supreme Court decide and a former Additional Advocate General, even because it restrained the media from reporting the case. The allegations within the FIR embody abuse of official positions within the State, sharing of privileged info and inflicting loss to the general public exchequer throughout the earlier Telugu Desam Party regime. The letter, which Mr. Reddy despatched the CJI on October 6, contained allegations in reference to the Amaravati land buy case. It was this letter which was launched on October 10 in a press convention.

On Tuesday, Justice Kaul highlighted that Justice Bhushan’s Bench, on November 25, has lifted the gag order on the media.

“So we have already entertained one petition [Andhra government’s appeal]. There cannot be any multiplicity of litigation… People cannot keep coming to us on this issue. This cannot be an endless exercise,” Justice Kaul informed the petitioners.

Advocate G.S. Mani, whose petition is the lead one, argued that the problem earlier than Justice Bhushan’s courtroom will not be the identical.

But Justice Kaul persevered that penalties flowing from the case earlier than Justice Bhushan might affect each facet of the problem, together with the discharge of the letter. The Bench refused Mr. Mani’s plea to tag his petition together with the Andhra Pradesh authorities’s case earlier than Justice Bhushan, saying this can’t devolve right into a “merry game”.

“A legal matter is being debated there, let it be debated,” Justice Kaul remarked.

However, the courtroom tagged a petition filed by advocate Sunil Kumar Singh, argued by advocate Mukti Singh, which stated the conduct of Mr. Reddy amounted to scandalising and weakening public religion within the judiciary. Ms. Singh referred to the E.M.S. Namboodiripad case, during which the then Kerala Chief Minister was held responsible of contempt of courtroom for his remarks against the judiciary.

Recently, Attorney General K.K. Venugopal had kept away from giving his statutory consent to pleas seeking contempt of courtroom motion against Mr. Reddy and his Principal Advisor Ajeya Kallam. Mr. Venugopal stated it was up to the CJI, who’s “seized of the letter” to take an acceptable determination. Supreme Court advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, in his contempt plea to Mr. Venugopal, claimed that the choice of a Bench led by Justice Ramana on September 16, directing expeditious completion of pending felony trials against politicians, had spurred Mr. Reddy to write the letter. Mr. Reddy, the lawyer stated, had 31 felony instances against him.