A decent burial to Jagan's tirade; Supreme Court leaves people guessing!

Finally, the curtains fell down on the much-debated letter of complaint addressed to the Chief Justice of India by the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh YS Jagan Mohan Reddy on October 6 last year, and made 'public' subsequently. In the said letter, Reddy had named and shamed the sitting senior Judge of the Apex court NV Ramana. The said letter, termed as 'the letter-bomb' by the legal observers, had all the trappings of a melodrama with punch. The letter, inter alia, contained serious allegations against the judge, such as his involvement in land-scam at the new capital of AP at Amaravati, undue interference and favoritism in judicial work etc.

The entire legal fraternity and concerned denizens at home besides netizens all over were waiting for some 'strong' reaction either from the Supreme Court of India, Attorney General of India or the Parliament on this rare incident. But much to the relief of the author of the letter, Jagan Mohan Reddy as also the targeted judge NV Ramana and much as a surprise and disappointment to the 'waiting' legal fraternity and others concerned, now comes the news that in reply to the Law Minister's letter dated March 19 seeking his recommendation for appointment of the next CJI.

The retiring Chief Justice of India SA Bobde has recommended the name of Justice Ramana to the Law Ministry for the appointment as his successor to the august post. Justice Bobde will retire from service on April 23 and if the government accepts the recommendation, Justice Ramana will take over as the next CJI on April 24 and will retire on August 26, 2022.

There is nothing new in the recommendation process. It is as per Memorandum of Procedure agreed to between the government and the apex court. Except in the years 1973 and 1977, when seniority was overlooked, during all these years since Independence, the next senior-most judge of the apex court steps into the shoes of the retiring CJI.

However, what baffles the observers is the announcement by the apex court that the complaint made by the AP Chief Minister is consigned to the dust bin after a group of the apex court's confidential deliberations on its contents.

Now, if we put one and two acts of the Supreme Court, the obvious conclusion we reach is that the highest court of the land having given due consideration to the said letter-bomb, has found nothing explosive in it and therefore, given a clean chit to Justice NV Ramana, which is evident from the fact that the outgoing CJI himself has chosen to recommend him as his successor. If so, the question that remains unanswered is : Why no action against Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy has been taken or proposed to be taken?

Article 129 of the Constitution of India and the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 gives ample powers to the court to deal with the matters contemptuous and disrespectful to the court and its functionaries. True, ultimately the concerned court has to decide whether to haul up a person for lowering the image of a judge or court in the public eye or let the complainant go with a stern warning after accepting his unconditional apology. But in the wider public interest, it is desirable that such discretion is exercised by the concerned court keeping in mind the message it would send to the people at large. The majesty of law and respect for the Judges and the courts are quintessential elements of the reliable and unbiased justice delivery system. By pushing Jagan Mohan Reddy's complaint against the probable next CJI under the carpet, the apex court has not only sacrificed transparency and fair play, but has also probably provided the motive power to the rumour mills.

Calcutta HC on the offence of cheating

A single-judge bench of the Calcutta High Court has ruled that non-issuance of duplicate share certificate to the shareholder does not attract the provision of Section 420 of IPC as to constitute an offence of cheating there must be an element of cheating right from the beginning. In the instant case, the company had already issued the original share certificates, the court observed.

Justice Surva Ghosh in Avion Builders Pvt Ltd & Ors Vs State of West Bengal & Ors, where the de facto petitioner had complained against the company and others under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B of IPC, observed: "No prima facie case of entrustment with or dominion over property or dishonest misappropriation of property or even ingredient of cheating has found place within the four corners of the complaint."

The opposite party had taken the plea that the matter was squarely governed by Section 46 of the Companies Act, 2013.

Telangana HC accedes to woman judges' demand

The High Court for the State of Telangana following a representation by the President, Telangana Judges' Association seeking parity with the State government employees and Jharkhand State Judiciary has acceded to the demand for five Special Casual Leaves to woman Judges working in the High Court and Subordinate Courts in the State in addition to regular 15 casual leaves. The Registrar General of the High Court issued a circular to this effect on March 26.

Madras High Court's concern for safety

In a first of its kind, the Madras High Court on March 22, expressed its concern over rising cases of Covid-19 in recent days and requested all political parties and candidates, who hold meetings and go campaigning all over Tamil Nadu, to ensure that at every gathering masks were worn by all and that social distancing norms were maintained without exception.

The bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Santhilkumar Ramamoorthy while declining the petitioner A Jalauddin's plea to prevent the election campaign in 234 constituencies for the State Assembly election in Tamil Nadu, observed: "It is no doubt a matter of concern that the Covid cases have been on the rise in the recent days and a second wave appears to be upon us. However, since the Assembly elections have been notified and the process is about to be completed by voting on April 6, 2021, it cannot be interfered with at this stage."

However, the court disposed of the petition with an appeal to all political parties and the candidates as above. The court also asked the Election Commission to send a message in this regard to all contesting candidates.