NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday in its order refused to entertain a petition seeking registration of a First Information Report (FIR) to probe against Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, from whose residence a huge pile of cash was allegedly recovered on March 14.
Lawyer Mathews J Nedumpara, who was the lead petitioner in the case along with two other advocates, Hemali Suresh Kurne, Rajesh Vishnu Adrekar and the CA, Mansha Nimesh Mehta, pleaded to the apex court bench, that the plea pertained to a larger public interest and thereby this court should direct registration of FIR.
The two-judge bench of the apex court, led by Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, refused to entertain the plea. "The in-house inquiry is ongoing. If the report sees something wrong, an FIR can be directed or the matter can be referred to parliament. Today is not the time to consider it," the Bench remarked.
Nedumpara, however, desperately argued that the common man kept on asking why no FIR was registered on March 14, why no FIR, no arrest, no seizure etc. "Why a week to release the scandal. Why did the collegium not say it has the videos etc. The common man will not understand," Nedumpara submitted to the top court.
After hearing these arguments, Justice Oka observed, "You must educate Ythe common man about the Supreme Court judgments laying down the law."
While refusing to entertain the plea, the bench said, "Please read both judgments laying down in house inquiry process. After the process, all options are open."
The top court further clarfied that at present an internal inquiry is ongoing. "So we cannot interfere at this stage and then all options are open with the Chief Justice of India," the Bench said.
The petition, a copy accessed by TNIE, sought to declare that the three-member Committee constituted by the collegium has no jurisdiction to conduct a probe into the incident that occurred on March, 14, at the official resident of Justice Varma where heaps of currency notes were by chance recovered in a fire constituting various cognisable under the BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita).
The plea said that the resolution of the collegium investing the Committee the power to conduct such an investigation is one rendered void ab initio inasmuch as the collegium cannot confer jurisdiction upon itself to order so where the Parliament or the Constitution has conferred none.
"The fire force and police, when their services for sought to douse fire constitute a cognisable offence punishable under various provisions of the BNS, they are duty bound to register an FIR," the plea said.
"The observations in the judgment of the Supreme Court in K Veeraswami against UOI prohibiting that no criminal case shall be registered against a judge of a High Court or Supreme Court without the prior permission of the Chief Justice of India are one rendered per incuriam and sub silentio," the plea said.
The petitioners sought an order from the top court directing the respondents, Delhi Police, to register an FIR and conduct an effective and meaningful investigation. They sought to restrain and prohibit any person or authority.
The plea further sought that appropriate order be made directing the Government to take effective and meaningful action for curbing corruption across all levels of the judiciary, including the enactment of the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010, which had lapsed.
The petition added that equality before law and equal protection of law is the core of our constitution. "All are equal before law and the criminal laws apply equally to all, irrespective of one's status or position. The only exception in our constitutional scheme is extended to the President and the Governors, the sovereign who represents we the people," it added.
The plea submitted that the law is the very edifice on which the concept of rule of law is built. Even the King is not considered above the law, but under God and the law. However, a five-judge constitution bench of this Court in Veeraswami versus Union of India, in 1991, directed that no criminal case shall be registered under Section 154 of the CrPC against a judge of the High Court, Chief Justice of a High Court or judge of the Supreme Court unless the Chief Justice of India is consulted in the matter.
