NEW DELHI: A decade after Supreme Court cancelled illegal allotment of coal blocks, mostly by the UPA govt, Enforcement Directorate on Monday sought clarity from the apex court on its decision barring high courts from entertaining accused’s appeals against trial court decisions.
Additional solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati told a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra that two three-judge benches, in their rulings of July 2014 and July 2017, had barred accused from moving HCs against proceedings before the special CBI judge to expedite the trial.
Bhati drew the court’s attention to two orders passed by a two-judge bench led by Justice A S Oka asking coal scam accused to move the jurisdictional HC for relief, while refusing to entertain their pleas.
The three-judge benches of the SC in their judgments of 2014 and 2017 had said if any accused wanted to challenge an order of the trial court, then they would have to move the SC directly. In doing so, the SC had followed an earlier judgment that had cancelled illegal allocation of 2G spectrum to private parties on a first come-first served basis. The intent of the court was to prevent accused in both 2G scam and coal scam from impeding the trial process by moving the HC and had kept only the forum of SC open for them.
Appearing for some accused, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi said the right of the accused, who are presumed innocent till pronounced guilty, could not be constricted by barring them from moving the jurisdictional HC under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to appeal against orders of the trial court.
Though the SC had taken care to stop accused from delaying trial by moving the top court, the stay it granted on April 1, 2015, to the summons issued by a trial court to former PM Manmohan Singh in the alleged irregular allocation of Talabira-II coal block in Odisha to Hindalco in 2005 has not come up for hearing even once in the last nearly one decade.
On April 1, 2015, the SC had stayed the summons and admitted the appeals filed by Singh and five other accused. The SC had said, “Since certain important substantial questions of law as well as the constitutional validity of Section 13(1)(d)(iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, are raised in the instant petitions, we are of the view that these matters require examination.” The SC had also stayed further proceedings in the case before the trial court.
The bench posted the matter for further hearing on Aug 19 and said it would have to read the two judgments in the coal scam cases and the subsequent orders of Justice Oka’s bench and then hear the parties to decide whether any clarification is needed.





Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *