NEW DELHI: The CBI case in the Supreme Court saw a sharp exchange of words on Tuesday between the two lawyers representing CBI Director Alok Kumar Verma, with the senior counsel questioning the move by his junior advocate in mentioning the matter on Monday without his consent.
Senior advocate Fali S Nariman, appearing for Verma, told a bench headed by Justice Ranjan Gogoi that he was not aware that lawyer Gopal Shankaranarayanan, who is also representing the CBI Director, had mentioned the matter on Monday before the court seeking some more time to file a reply on his behalf without his consent.
"Nobody had asked him (Shankaranarayanan) to do so. It was totally unauthorised. I was never informed. Nobody asked him to mention the matter. I am very disturbed," Nariman told the bench, also comprising justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph.
The senior counsel further added that he and his junior had worked late in the night to prepare Verma's response to the CVC's findings against him over the alleged corruption charges against the CBI Director.
The bench, which was miffed over the purported leak of Verma's confidential response to Central Vigilance Commission's (CVC) preliminary inquiry report, adjourned the matter for hearing on November 29.
Later, Nariman again mentioned the matter before the bench and requested that it should be re-heard.
The bench allowed his request and when the matter was taken up for hearing, Shankaranarayanan said that the senior counsel had earlier submitted that he was not authorised to mention the matter.
"I need to clear my name," Shankaranarayanan said.
However, the CJI observed, "We are not prepared to hear Mr Gopal Shankaranarayanan. We are prepared to hear Mr Nariman only. We want this place clear. As far as this court in concerned Mr Shankaranarayanan, nobody is under any cloud."
When Shankaranarayanan tried to clarify and said, "I had the permission from the client (Verma) to mention the matter," Nariman maintained that he, being the senior counsel, was not informed about the mentioning on Monday.
Nariman said that when a senior counsel is representing a client, he or she is the "in-charge" of the case and needs to be informed before any mentioning in the court.
"Please do not raise your voice," Nariman said, "I am speaking here with my 67 year's of experience. I know what to do. Do not tell me what should I do".
Nariman further suggested that the issue be left alone.
On Monday, the apex court had asked Verma to file his response "as quickly as possible" during the day on findings of the CVC's preliminary probe report on alleged corruption charges against him.
Sankaranarayanan, who had mentioned the matter, told the bench that they needed some more time to file Verma's reply.
The bench is dealing with Verma's plea challenging the government's decision to divest him of duties and sending him on leave.