The Centre on Tuesday withdrew the demand for the recall of the July 4 Supreme Court order on black money and decided to settle for a mere modification of the direction to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe such cases.
The move came on a day the apex court stayed the release of Hasan Ali Khan, who had been granted bail by the Bombay High Court in a black money case.
A bench presided over by Justice Altamas Kabir stayed the operation of the high court order while issuing notice on an appeal by the Enforcement Directorate.
Listing the matter for hearing on Thursday, the court said the order granting bail should be on hold till then. Khan, who is facing charges of parking thousands of crores in foreign banks, was arrested after the Supreme Court's observations alleging inaction on part of the ED in the case.
In the earlier case, with the petitioners submitting that the government was seeking a review of the order in the name of modification, the bench observed that it would first hear arguments on maintainability of the application by the Centre.
Attorney General G. E. Vahanvati submitted before the bench that the government only wanted modification of "paragraphs 49 and 50" of the order. The paragraphs pertain to directions on constitution and working of the SIT on black money.
The Centre in its application filed earlier had sought "recall" of the order and modification of the directions. It had specifically alleged that paragraphs 1 to 20 of the order were written without hearing arguments.
The court had violated the principles of natural justice by not hearing it, the Centre had contended.
Senior counsel Anil Divan, appearing for petitioner Ram Jethmalani, objected to a paragraph in the application stating that then solicitor general Gopal Subramanium was not authorised to make admissions on behalf of the government.
Opposing the application, Divan said the government was seeking a review of the order but had filed an application for modification instead of filing a review petition. A review petition is decided in chambers without hearing the petitioner.
He said the Centre had served a fresh application on Tuesday in which it had sought modification of paragraphs 49 and 50. Incidentally, the term "recall" did not find mention in the new application. Divan said the government had not complied with the order despite there being no stay. "The Centre is brazenly in breach of all directions," he said.
Vahanvati stressed that the government now wanted limited relief.
On Divan questioning the very maintainability of the application, Vahanvati said: "I am ready for arguments on maintainability and even contempt." The matter will come up for hearing before the Supreme Court on August 24.
The move came on a day the apex court stayed the release of Hasan Ali Khan, who had been granted bail by the Bombay High Court in a black money case.
A bench presided over by Justice Altamas Kabir stayed the operation of the high court order while issuing notice on an appeal by the Enforcement Directorate.
Listing the matter for hearing on Thursday, the court said the order granting bail should be on hold till then. Khan, who is facing charges of parking thousands of crores in foreign banks, was arrested after the Supreme Court's observations alleging inaction on part of the ED in the case.
In the earlier case, with the petitioners submitting that the government was seeking a review of the order in the name of modification, the bench observed that it would first hear arguments on maintainability of the application by the Centre.
Attorney General G. E. Vahanvati submitted before the bench that the government only wanted modification of "paragraphs 49 and 50" of the order. The paragraphs pertain to directions on constitution and working of the SIT on black money.
The Centre in its application filed earlier had sought "recall" of the order and modification of the directions. It had specifically alleged that paragraphs 1 to 20 of the order were written without hearing arguments.
The court had violated the principles of natural justice by not hearing it, the Centre had contended.
Senior counsel Anil Divan, appearing for petitioner Ram Jethmalani, objected to a paragraph in the application stating that then solicitor general Gopal Subramanium was not authorised to make admissions on behalf of the government.
Opposing the application, Divan said the government was seeking a review of the order but had filed an application for modification instead of filing a review petition. A review petition is decided in chambers without hearing the petitioner.
He said the Centre had served a fresh application on Tuesday in which it had sought modification of paragraphs 49 and 50. Incidentally, the term "recall" did not find mention in the new application. Divan said the government had not complied with the order despite there being no stay. "The Centre is brazenly in breach of all directions," he said.
Vahanvati stressed that the government now wanted limited relief.
On Divan questioning the very maintainability of the application, Vahanvati said: "I am ready for arguments on maintainability and even contempt." The matter will come up for hearing before the Supreme Court on August 24.
No comments:
Post a Comment