CJI rejects INDIA bloc leaders’ request for meeting over ‘vote chori’
NEW DELHI: A day after CJI Surya Kant turned down Congress leadership's request to meet them privately on their "vote chori" charge, saying doing so will violate the principle of separation of powers, SC Monday reiterated that it should not be dragged into political battlefields nor politics be brought into the court."We are not concerned with political parties or their activities. But courts should not be dragged into such kinds of things," said a bench of CJI Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.In an email response, through which he turned down the request from leaders of opposition in the two Houses of Parliament, Rahul Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge, for a face-to-face meeting, CJI had pointed out to them that it was duty-bound to hear petitions against CEC Gyanesh Kumar and those challenging SIR, and indicated that the court will hear those on priority.Wherever identified locations are there, protests can be held: SCThe CJI-led bench Monday emphasised the need for it to exercise restraint and not enter the political thicket while hearing the complaint that protests and barricades were obstructing lawyers from working.At the commencement of proceedings, senior advocate Atmaram Nadkarni sought urgent hearing on a writ petition filed by a lawyer, saying he could not represent his client at an international arbitration because of protests and preventive measures.
Nadkarni was joined by SCBA president Pradeep Rai who said the right to protest must co-exist with the right of other citizens to move and function without hindrance. SC agreed to list both the petitions for hearing on Tuesday along with pleas by Shailendra Mani Tripathi, opposition MPs M A Baby, Manoj Jha and Menaka Guruswamy, who have accused police of using excessive force to quell protests.Rai said, “Institution is performing its institutional duty and we are doing our professional duties.
Political parties must not interfere with our domain.”CJI Surya Kant, while saying that court would not wade into others’ turf, said, “Democratic institutions should be allowed to function peacefully and there should not be any impediment in the functioning or movement of lawyers, court staff and litigants.”Following Nadkarni and Rai, advocate G Sankaranarayanan mentioned another petition repeating what was argued — detention of senior advocate Shadan Farasat in an “unseemly” manner — before SC on Sunday and suggested that asking protesters to exercise restraint, be peaceful and cooperate when police was using excessive force, was not fair.“I know SC has repeatedly said we must try to cooperate and exercise restraint. For once I would hope that court would say the same thing to police. That has not come from this bench so far. I am hoping that happens because of excesses they are allowing... the hooligans were roaming around with sticks,” he said.
“They have hit children on the head and put out videos and proudly posted the videos saying they have done this and police have done nothing.
And we are being told to exercise restraint. I do not know what we have done to be told to exercise restraint. At some point the bench will come to the rescue of the bar and the citizens of this country and send a strong message to the police,” he added.CJI agreed to list the petition on Tuesday but stressed yet again: “I will not allow SC or SC campus to become a political battlefield. We do not want advocates and lawyers to be part of the political battles inside the court premises. Wherever identified locations (for protest) are there, the protests can be held there.”