The Supreme Court on Saturday stayed a Gauhati high court order that held the CBI unconstitutional, saying accused in two sensational cases sought halting of trials on the basis of the HC judgment.
Former telecom minister A Raja, an accused in the 2G spectrum scam, and 1984 riots accused Sajjan Kumar had on Friday attempted to use the HC verdict to stay legal proceedings against them.
The apex order came after the Union government sought an urgent hearing on Saturday, contending the Gauhati HC order would adversely impact thousands of criminal cases pending across the country.
An SC bench took the decision in an urgent hearing held at Chief Justice P Sathasivam’s residence and scheduled the next hearing in the case for December 6. It also sent notices to all parties involved in the case, including Narendra Kumar on whose petition the high court had pronounced its verdict.
“In the meantime, there shall be a stay of operation of the final judgment and the impugned order dated November 6, 2013,” said the bench, also comprising justice Ranjana Prakash Desai.
Talking to journalists after the 19-minute hearing, attorney general GE Vahanvati said the questions that were raised by the HC while giving the verdict were wrong and so was its conclusion.
Earlier, the special leave petition settled by Vahanvati before the hearing said, “If the impugned order is not stayed, it will frustrate the law machinery and may result in multiplicity of proceedings.”
A division bench of Gauhati high court had on November 6 quashed the April 1, 1963 resolution constituting CBI under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 and declared all its actions unconstitutional.
The government had sought an urgent hearing against the HC verdict saying it “directly impacts about nine thousand trials currently underway and about one thousand investigations which are being undertaken by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).”
“The order is already being seized upon by various accused persons in various proceedings in the country to seek a stay of further proceedings against them,” the petition said.
(Source:HT)
