Read Time: 08 minutes

Supreme Court grants relief in the plea by Justice Eswaraiah; says High Court could not have passed any directions except on Maintainability.

A Division Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice R. Subhash Reddy, while allowing the plea by Justice Eswaraiah, observed that directions to conduct an enquiry was not warranted of the High Court. Making no observations on merits, matter was directed back to the High Court.

“We are of the view that the High Court ought not to have embarked on any other enquiry in the matter except to the maintainability of the PIL at the instance of the writ petitioner and the conversation dated 20.07.2020 filed before the High Court as well as the enquiry report sought was only with the above purpose.”, the bench said.

Earlier the bench while hearing an application for further hearing in the matter, said, “We find no reason to interfere with the IA. Matter to be listed for judgment on Monday.”

Senior Advocate Mr Siddharth Luthra appeared for the Applicant.

It was submitted by the learned Senior Counsel that, “The original document has gone missing from the custody of the State. I have never seen a case where the material goes missing from the custody of the State. The court may take into consideration the following fact for judgment.”

The brief issue of intervention was to place additional evidence in the matter, which on account of being misplaced, were not being considered by the concerned authorities.

Supreme Court had reserved orders in Justice V. Eswaraiah’s plea challenging the order of Andhra Pradesh High Court, directing probe into an alleged conspiracy against Supreme Court and High Court judges, on February 22, 2021.

Justice V. Eswaraiah had moved to the Supreme Court against a Division Bench order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, directing an investigation into a private conversation between himself and a suspended Munsif Magistrate.

The said order was made on the allegation of hatching a ‘serious conspiracy’ against the High Court Chief Justice and a Senior sitting Judge of the Supreme Court. 

Brief Facts of the Case

On 13th August, 2020, A Division Bench of Justice M. Satyanarayana Murthy and Justice Lalitha Kanneganti of Andhra Pradesh High Court appointed Retired Justice R.V. Raveendran to submit a report on the basis on an enquiry, as to the genuineness of the alleged conversation in the pen-drive, the persons involved and undisclosed interests of the third party.

On 1st December, 2020, a Special Leave Petition was filed through Senior Counsel Mr. Prashant Bhushan against the aforementioned order of the High Court, clarifying the bona fide of the petitioner, stating, “…the misconduct which he (Justice Eswaraiah) was talking about was the subject matter of an enquiry by the cabinet subcommittee regarding dubious property transactions for unlawful gain, also involving the said sitting Supreme Court Judge and other public servants at the helm of affairs in the erstwhile Government in Andhra Pradesh”

On 11th January, 2021, Supreme Court asked the Petitioner to file an affidavit admitting to have entered into a private conversation with the suspended Magistrate.

It was pleaded by learned senior counsel, Mr. Bhushan, “How can a private conversation be enquired into by the High Court? I fail to see what crime has been committed even if the conversation revolves around some misconduct by the Supreme Court judge and the High Court Chief Justice? … I request for a notice on my petition and for a stay on the enquiry.”

On 17th January, 2021, it was submitted by the petitioner that the conversation was related to Benami transactions in the new capital of AP and the relation of it with the said Supreme Court judge. It was further asserted that any allegation of ‘conspiracy’ or ‘plot’ is far-fetched and derogatory, in as much as, the petitioner has always endeavoured to protect and preserve the Independence of Judiciary.

Case Title: Justice V. Eswaraiah v. Union of India