Supreme Court Judge Justice Surya Kent Recuses From Hearing From Plea Seeking Cancellation Of Bail Granted TO SAD Leader Bikram Singh Majithia

The Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjabi versus Bikram Singh Majithia, wherein the bench headed by Justice Surya Kant recused himself from hearing an appeal filed by the Punjab government against the order of the High Court granting regular bail to Shiromani Akali and Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia in connection with a drugs case, The current case was being heard by a bench consisting of Justices Surya Kant and JK Maheshwari. , , The counsel, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for the Punjab government, started his submissions. Before the bench headed by Justice Surya, Kant stated that he had led the High Court bench which directed the Special Task Force to investigate the case. The bench, after a brief discussion, ordered that the matter be listed before a bench of which Justice Kant is not a member. The court noted that the Punjab and Haryana High Courts had granted bail to the former minister and the senior leader of the Shiromani Akali Dal in the drugs case being filed against him. The division bench of the High Court, comprising of Justice MS Ramachandra Rao and Justice Sureshwar Thakur, in the case, observed and allowed the bail plea filed by Majithia last year. , , It has been contended by Majithia before the High Court that the cases filed against him under the NDPS Act were completely political in nature and were being vitiated by political and ulterior motives. Further, it is asserted that Majithia has no criminal record and is a mainstream politician, and he has also undertaken to join the investigation, which means fully cooperating with the investigating agency and abiding by any conditions that may be imposed by the Court. , Previously, the bench of Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice PS Nara-, simha in the case observed and granted liberty to the SAD Leader to approach the Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court against the quashing of the FIR registered against him in the NDPS case and for the grant of bail.