New Delhi, May 10
The Supreme Court today agreed to the plea of Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav that he has a right to challenge the constitution of a Patna High Court Bench to hear his petition on the issue of sanction for his prosecution in a disproportionate assets (DA) case but reserved its verdict about the modified order in this regard.
The apex court, however, took exception to Mr Lalu Yadav raising the question about its order about constituting the high court Bench before its acting Chief Justice who was directed to set up the special Bench to dispose of his and his wife Rabri Devi’s petitions within a month, saying that if he was aggrieved, he should have approached this court instead of moving the high court.
“We totally agree with the contention of the petitioner (Lalu Yadav). I have no difficulty with your contention. I wish you had come to us instead of arguing the matter there (high court),” Mr Justice S.N. Variava, heading a three-judge Bench observed.
The Bench, comprising Mr Justice A.R. Lakshmanan and Mr Justice S.H. Kapadia as the other two judges, said it would pass an appropriate modified order on the issue.
In its April 26 order, the Bench had directed Patna High Court acting Chief Justice to set up a Bench of Mr Justice Altab Alam and Mr Justice Chandramouli Prasad to hear Mr Lalu Yadav and Ms Rabri Devi’s petitions.
The Railway Minister had moved an application before the high court’s acting Chief Justice, questioning the Supreme Court order naming the judges of the Bench, saying that it was purely the prerogative of the high court Chief Justice.
The High Court’s acting Chief Justice on May 6 passed an order on Mr Yadav’s plea stating that the court agreed with his contention that the prerogative was vested in the High Court Chief Justice but an order about constituting a new Bench would be passed by him only after today’s hearing of the apex court.
Mr Yadav had even moved an application in the apex court wanting to say something “in confidence” about setting up of the High Court Bench with Mr Justice Chandramouli Prasad as one of the judges.
The apex court said “Let the Chief Justice fix a Bench. We have no problem in it and we are not interested in one or the other judge. If you (Lalu) feel that we should not do it, we will not do it.”
But the Bench reminded Mr Yadav’s counsel, Mr Ram Jethmalani, that it had only passed the order after getting an impression that he had consented for setting up of the Bench with the two high court judges named by it.
