Today(7th August),The Supreme Court saw a notable exchange between Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal over case listings. Sibal, representing Abhishek Banerjee, highlighted the difficulty in arguing the matter due to a conflicting schedule with another Bench hearing the same day.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(7th August), The Supreme Court witnessed a notable exchange between Justice Bela M Trivedi and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal regarding the listing of cases. The Bench, which included Justices Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, was hearing a case related to the summons issued by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Abhishek Banerjee and his wife, necessitating their presence in Delhi for interrogation.
During the hearing, Sibal, representing the Banerjees, expressed his difficulty in arguing the matter due to a batch of pleas challenging the Vijay Madanlal judgment being listed before another Bench at 2 PM the same day.
He voiced his concern by stating-
“I cannot control the roster. The bench for the PMLA review was formed unexpectedly.”
Justice Trivedi, addressing Sibal’s predicament, remarked-
“You need to take action. This is an ongoing case.”
Justice Trivedi acknowledged his statement, replying-
“Clearly, you do not have control over the roster.”
Consequently, the hearing was adjourned to the following day.
Justice Trivedi has been at the center of attention amidst allegations that the Supreme Court roster was being manipulated to list sensitive criminal cases before her. This issue was highlighted when Advocate Prashant Bhushan, in December of the previous year, wrote to the Supreme Court Registry. He raised concerns about cases involving two advocates and a journalist being listed before a bench headed by Justice Trivedi.
Adding to the controversy, Senior Advocate and former Supreme Court Bar Association President Dushyant Dave also penned a letter to Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, expressing his discontent with these practices. However, the CJI declined to intervene in the matter of listing Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain’s bail petition in a money-laundering case before Justice Trivedi.
In February of the previous year, the CJI defended the Supreme Court Registry’s actions.
Sources within the apex court echoed the CJI’s sentiments, stating-
“It is unfair to refuse to appear before Justice Trivedi under any circumstances. Every judge is part of the judicial system, and lawyers should be prepared to present their case before any judge. Seeking a specific order simply because the stakes are high is not appropriate. While some may view Justice Bela Trivedi as stricter due to her background in district judiciary, this is a matter of personal experience. Insisting on a particular judge or court is not acceptable.”
In the current case, back in May 2022, the Supreme Court permitted Banerjee and his wife to be interrogated at the ED’s Kolkata Office concerning a coal mining scam case.
