 |
|
SC seeks details about Buta’s report to President New Delhi, September 21 The news report, dated May 21, published in The Sunday Tribune of May 22 virtually became a subject matter of an intensive debate for about an hour during the ongoing hearing on the dissolution issue, as Soli J. Sorabjee cast doubt about the actual timing of the sending of the communication by the Governor on the basis of it, resulting in the Court asking for the complete details about the transmission and receipt of the documents. Sorabjee, appearing for four NDA MLAs, who have challenged the dissolution, alleged that Governor though had annexed The Tribune report of May 21 as proof in his communication of the identical date, but “I am not able to understand how he had the access to it even before it was published in The Sunday Tribune on May 22”. “This raises serious doubt about the actual timings of sending of the report, specially when the Governor was in a tearing hurry to recommend the dissolution of the Assembly, in which he had shown more concern about the restiveness of RJD MLAs. Otherwise, the Governor’s report had nothing to show that he had concrete evidence of horse trading,” Sorabjee said. Quoting extensively from the news report, he said it appeared that the Governor had in fact prepared his report after reading its contents as many of the averments of it were re-produced in his communication to the President. Agreeing with his contention, the five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Mr Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, sought explanation from Additional Advocate-General (ASG) Gopal Subramaniam as how a news report, supposed to be published on May 22, could form a part of the annexure of a letter sent on May 21. This raised doubt about the actual time of sending the report, the court observed, asking the ASG whether the “Governor had actually sent his letter on May 21 or wrote it pre-dated on May 22”. To a specific query as what were the timings of receiving the Governor’s communication, which he had sent from his camp office in Delhi, Subramaniam said according to his instruction, it was received by the President Secretariat in the afternoon of May 22 and by the Home Ministry on the same day. But he could not give the exact time of its receipt by the Home Ministry, saying he had to confirm it.The court also sought details whether the newspaper reports or any other material was sent to the President for his subjective satisfaction after Sorabjee pointed out that in the May 21 letter of Buta Singh, he nowhere mentioned of inclusion of any annexure. Since the four former NDA MLAs in their petition had alleged that the Assembly was dissolved to prevent Nitish Kumar from forming the government after a breakaway faction of the LJP had pledged support to him, their counsel Sorabjee reading out from The Tribune report said that even it did not have a word about any allurement or horse trading though the Governor had heavily relied upon it as a poof. The Tribune report titled “LJP on verge of split, Nitish may form govt in Bihar” had mainly mentioned about how “cobbling” of a majority by NDA under the leadership of Nitish Kumar in Bihar had “gained momentum”, Sorabjee said, adding “garning support is not allurement”. Reiterating his accusation against Buta Singh of acting with “mala fide” intention to prevent the NDA from forming the government, he said the two reports of the Governor of April 27 and May 21 were “perverse” documents, based on “surmises and conjecture”. “Even the two affidavits filed by the Union Government had no specific mention of horse trading, which was made the ground for midnight dissolution of the Assembly,” Sorabjee said. He also pointed out that two LJP MLAs, from whom letters of complaints were obtained about alleged offering of Rs 1 crore each, were recently rewarded by the Governor with lucrative appointments. While one of the complainants Sajay Singh was appointed General Secretary of Bihar Nagrish Parishad, a ministerial rank post, father of second complainant Maheshwar Hazari was appointed as vice-president of the body, Sorabjee pointed out. Attorney-General Milon Banerjee and Subramanium would respond to his argument tomorrow.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
