The Hindu : National : "Lalu will not get justice in Bihar"

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Dec 07, 2005

National

National

"Lalu will not get justice in Bihar"

J. Venkatesan

Great prejudice has been caused by earlier order, counsel tells Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: Senior counsel Ram Jethmalani on Tuesday complained before the Supreme Court that his client, Union Railway Minister Lalu Prasad, will not get justice in Bihar and Jharkhand in the fodder scam cases, since "great prejudice has been caused by the earlier order passed by the apex court on October 26."

Expressing his apprehension before a Bench of Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice A.R. Lakshmanan and Justice S.H. Kapadia, Mr. Jethmalani said: "It has now become impossible to seek justice in Bihar and Jharkhand. I will apply for transfer of these cases for trial outside the two States."

The Bench was hearing a petition filed by Sushil Modi, BJP Member of Parliament, and Rajiv Ranjan Singh a JD(U) MP, seeking cancellation of the bail granted to Mr. Prasad and his wife, Rabri Devi, in the fodder scam and disproportionate assets cases.

On October 26, the Supreme Court sought details from the Patna High Court about the appointment of Munni Lal Paswan as a special judge to try the fodder scam cases against Mr. Lalu Prasad and others after the promotion of Yogendra Prasad, who had been hearing the cases. It sought details about the appointment of the 14 judges by the Full Court or by a committee of Judges of the High Court and the minutes of its meeting.

Mr. Jethmalani's grievance was that in the last portion of the order, the apex court had said: "It is clarified that neither due to fact of pendency of these writ petitions nor by any order is there any restraint on the Chief Justice, who has recently taken charge, from reconsidering who is to be posted for hearing of the concerned fodder scam case, if he is so inclined to do."

He argued that through this order, the apex court had virtually given a direction to the High Court Chief Justice to change the judge hearing the fodder scam cases.

When the Bench said it was only an administrative order and that no direction had been given to the Chief Justice to change the judge, counsel said: "It was not only an administrative order but formed part of judicial one which could cause great prejudice and damage to my client."Describing the October 26 order as unfortunate, he said: "Why are you activating his [Chief Justice's] mind. Protect me from this insinuation." He sought modification of the order.

In a brief clarification, the Bench said: "We make it clear that it [the October 26 order] is not to be taken as a direction to change the judicial officer for the time being."

The Bench directed that the matter be listed for further hearing on January 10, 2006. In the meanwhile, it permitted the parties to peruse the report sent by the Registrar-General of the High Court.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National

News Update

Stories in this Section