New Delhi: The Centre has asked the Supreme Court not to entertain a plea seeking a probe against the Home Minister P Chidambaram in the 2G scam. The apex court however rejected the contention.
"You are referring to Lakshman Rekha. If Sita had not crossed the Lakshman Rekha then Ravana would not have been killed. Lakshman Rekha was crossed and the demons were killed.Lakshman Rekha is not so sacrosanct. People are fond of saying so," a bench of justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly said.
The court's remark came after senior advocate P P Rao, appearing for the Centre, contended that the monitoring jurisdiction of the apex court came to an end after a chargesheet was filed by the CBI in the 2G scam in April this year and the bench should not cross the Lakshman Rekha by entertaining Janta Party President Subramanian Swamy plea against Chidambaram.
"It is well settled that the task of monitoring by the apex court would come to an end the moment the chargesheet was filed and thereafter the ordinary process of law would take place," Rao said adding that such a petition is not maintainable in the apex court and Swamy should approach the Special CBI court which is holding the trial in the case.
The bench then questioned Rao on why the concept of court monitoring in cases has come into existence at all. "Why is there this this concept of monitoring at all? Till the Vineet Narayan case(1996) there was no court monitoring. Why then has it has become necessary now?" the bench asked.
Rao replied that it was a part of the evolution of law and the law evolves according to necessity.
The bench then said that it has evolved because of emerging corruption and lack of proper investigation by the agency in many cases.
"Court monitoring is because of widespread malice. Is it not so? These types of cases were not there in the past," the bench said.
"You are referring to Lakshman Rekha. If Sita had not crossed the Lakshman Rekha then Ravana would not have been killed. Lakshman Rekha was crossed and the demons were killed.Lakshman Rekha is not so sacrosanct. People are fond of saying so," a bench of justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly said.
The court's remark came after senior advocate P P Rao, appearing for the Centre, contended that the monitoring jurisdiction of the apex court came to an end after a chargesheet was filed by the CBI in the 2G scam in April this year and the bench should not cross the Lakshman Rekha by entertaining Janta Party President Subramanian Swamy plea against Chidambaram.
"It is well settled that the task of monitoring by the apex court would come to an end the moment the chargesheet was filed and thereafter the ordinary process of law would take place," Rao said adding that such a petition is not maintainable in the apex court and Swamy should approach the Special CBI court which is holding the trial in the case.
The bench then questioned Rao on why the concept of court monitoring in cases has come into existence at all. "Why is there this this concept of monitoring at all? Till the Vineet Narayan case(1996) there was no court monitoring. Why then has it has become necessary now?" the bench asked.
Rao replied that it was a part of the evolution of law and the law evolves according to necessity.
The bench then said that it has evolved because of emerging corruption and lack of proper investigation by the agency in many cases.
"Court monitoring is because of widespread malice. Is it not so? These types of cases were not there in the past," the bench said.
No comments:
Post a Comment