Supreme Court Seeks Report From Madras HC After CBI's Claim That Detailed Order Was Uploaded After Judge's Retirement

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (September 3) directed the Registrar General of the Madras High Court to submit a report following CBI's claim that the HC passed a single-line order in a case, and the detailed order was not made available till the judge demitted office.A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih was hearing a Special Leave Petition filed by the CBI challenging an order of the HC Single-Judge Justice T. Mathivanan quashing a corruption case against an IRS officer."The contention of the petitioner is that on 15th May 2017 a single line order was pronounced by the learned Judge and till the date on which the learned judge demitted office reasoned judgment was not available. We therefore direct Registrar General of High Court at to furnish the following information..."The Supreme Court directed the Registrar General of the Madras HC to provide the following information:1. The date on which the detailed judgment was received by the Registry from the judge's office.2. The date when the detailed judgment was uploaded.3. Whether there was any administrative direction from the Chief Justice of the HC for a de novo hearing of nine cases that were heard by the judge, and whether the case that is the subject matter of the current SLP is included among those cases.The present case revolves around an alleged disproportionate assets case involving an IRS officer from the 1999 batch, who was working as the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax at the time of the registration of the FIR. The allegations pertain to the accumulation of assets and pecuniary resources amounting to over Rs. 3.2 Crores by the officer and his wife between January 1, 2002, and August 30, 2014. The CBI alleged that these assets are disproportionate to their known sources of income and unaccounted for satisfactorily.As per the HC judgment, which is now available on the official website, the HC quashed the FIR, opining that the proceedings appeared to have been initiated with mala fide intent, with the ulterior motive of personal vendetta.The CBI has claimed before the Supreme Court that the HC Single-Judge passed a one-line order in court on May 15, 2017 and on the same day, it applied for a certified copy of the order. The counsel appearing for CBI submitted that the Registry orally informed the CBI that the detailed order had not yet been received from the judge's office. The concerned judge retired on May 26, 2017. The CBI was provided with a certified copy of the impugned order July 26, 2017, as per the petition.The Court noted that petitioner's main contention is that the reasons recorded by the HC judge were not made available until the judge demitted office. Additionally, the counsel for CBI brought to the Court's attention a letter by the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) for the CBI to the then Joint Director, which stated that nine cases heard by the judge were ordered to be heard afresh. Although the letter did not specifically mention the case number of the present SLP, the CBI's counsel argued that this case is also included in the nine cases subject to de novo hearings.The Court directed Registrar (Judicial) of the Supreme Court to get infromation from the Registrar General of the HC. The Supreme Court has directed that the report of the HC Registrar be submitted by the end of this month.This is not the first time when the Supreme Court has dealt with such an issue. Recently, a bench of Justice Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan quashed a judgment by the same judge of the Madras HC on the ground that the judge released the detailed reasons for the judgment nearly five months after retirement. The bench observed that a judge retaining the case file and issuing a detailed judgment post-retirement was a "gross impropriety."Related - 'Judgments Of Retired Judges Not To Be Uploaded 3 Days After Their Retirement' : Kerala High Court Chief Justice Issues GuidelinesCase no. – SLP (Crl.) No. 9492/2018 Diary No. 29909/2018Case Title – State through the Inspector of Police CBI/ACB/Chennai v. S. Murali MohanClick Here To Read/Download Order

Supreme Court Seeks Report From Madras HC After CBI's Claim That Detailed Order Was Uploaded After Judge's Retirement

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags