Khurshid remarks disturbing: SC
In another trouble for the government in the 2G case, the Supreme Court on Wednesday took serious note of law minister Salman Khurshid’s statement, which it said gave an impression that the court was “interested” in keeping the accused corporate honchos behind the bar.
A bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and H.L. Dattu said the statement of the law minister published in leading newspaper coming “amidst” the hearing of the bail plea of Unitech promoter Sanjay Chandra was “disturbing”.
The top court also questioned CBI for a media statement attributed to the agency that it would “not oppose the bail of DMK MP Kanimozhi” and expressed grave concern of such statements coming while the case was “subjudice”.
The bench was so exasperated on Mr Khurshid’s statement that it told additional solicitor-general Haren Raval, appearing for the CBI, that the government should make its stand clear on the whole issue.
In a tone laced with sarcasm, Justice Dattu said, “if this is the stand of the government then it should be clarified. You file a memo please release them, we will release them.”
Justice Dattu drew the attention of Mr Raval to Mr Khurshid’s statement when CBI counsel emphasised his point that Mr Chandra did not deserve to be released from jail at this stage. Justice Dattu said, “There is some confusion... a newspaper has reported a statement attributed to the minister giving an impression that we are interested to keep these businessmen behind the bar... this is disturbing for us, if it is true.”
As Mr Raval said in this case he was only representing the CBI not the government, the bench said, “to say that CBI is not part of the Central government is a misnomer”.
Justice Dattu told the ASG that from the statement of the minister (reportedly stating that putting the businessmen behind the bar will hamper investments in the country) it was clear that it was well intended as when the correspondent, who interviewed him put a counter question on the issue, “he (Mr Khurshid) said, I mean what I say”.
The statement came when “you (CBI) are amidst of a serious matter (bail of Mr Chandra) going on for past six hearings,” the bench said, adding “this may of course not affect the court proceedings” but was not proper.
Even Mr Chandra’s counsel Ram Jethmalani, who earlier had tried to make a case for bail to the Unitech top boss, disapproved Mr Khurshid’s statement coming in a sujudice matter.
“I don’t’ like such a statement being made by the minister,” Mr Jethmalani said while another senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for Unitech executive Vinod Goinka verified the “correctness” of Mr Khurshid’s statement, saying “I was called for a debate on a TV channel on the statement, this was correct.”
Post new comment