The objection has been raised by Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi before the Chief Justice of India with regards to the listing of the bail petition of Aam Aadmi Party leader Satyendar Jain before a bench led by Justice Bela Trivedi.
Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi stated that the case was listed before Justice AS Bopanna, which he heard it for 2.5 hours and now the case is listed before Justice Bela Trivedi.
The bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud did not seem to be inclined to change the bench combination.
He stated that I will not control what the judge is doing in the matter listed before her and the matter is listed before the judge, thus, the judge will take a call on it. I cannot.
It has also been stated by Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi that he was just asking for a deferment in the matter.
The bench of CJI in the case observed and has reiterated that once the matter had been listed before a judge, he could not intervene.
In the present case, Jain, the former Cabinet Minister of the Delhi Government, was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering case on 30.05.2022. Thus, he remained in the custody until a vacation bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice PS Narasimha granted him interim bail on health grounds on May 26 this year.
The bench comprising of Justice AS Bopanna and Justice MM Sundresh extended the interim bail after a brief hearing.
The said matter was listed before the bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and PK Mishra, but was adjourned following the recusal of Justice Misha.
Later, the said matter was posted before the combination of Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Bela M Trivedi on a couple of occasions.
The present matter was listed before a bench comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma.
The court in the case stated that this is not the first time that a listing of a matter before the bench of Justice Trivedi’s has attracted controversy.
Previously, it has been written by the Tamil Nadu Vigilance Director to the Supreme Court Registry wherein it objected to the listing of an appeal before Justice Trivedi’s bench on the ground that the matter was previously heard by Justice Aniruddha Bose’s bench.
The court in the case observed that last week, Advocate Prashant Bhushan wrote to the Supreme Court registry wherein it alleged irregularities in the listing of UAPA pleas before the bench of Justice Trivedi’s and the common ground of objection taken in these instances is that as per the SC rules, when a bench combination changes, the matter should follow the bench of the senior judge of that bench.