Premium
This is an archive article published on September 10, 2009

Blast convicts’ release plea: officials who kept court in the dark may face contempt charges

The Bombay High Court bench is contemplating contempt proceedings against the government officials concerned for not informing the court about the state’s decision on blast convicts seeking premature release and for leaking the sensitive order to the media.

The Bombay High Court bench is contemplating contempt proceedings against the government officials concerned for not informing the court about the state’s decision on blast convicts seeking premature release and for leaking the sensitive order to the media.

The court was hearing the case of four 1993 serial blasts convicts seeking premature release. The state home department has,however,ordered to put blast convicts behind bars for 60 years which the court had said was not acceptable.

The court was peeved as it was not informed about the order during the last hearing on August 12,even though the order was passed on August 4 as per the press report.

Story continues below this ad

Advocate General Ravi Kadam on Wednesday strongly defended the government and said that the copy of the order was available with many people including the convict’s families and various officials like the police commissioner and DIG and IG of Prisons. Kadam was justifying the state after the judge said that this is a case for issuing contempt.

An affidavit tendered on Tuesday by Anna Dani,Principal Secretary (Appeals and Security),stated that they had no intention to keep court in the dark about the decision taken.

Dani also apologised and said that she has taken up the matter with the concerned authorities and has asked the office of the public prosecutor for proper coordination henceforth. Irked justice Nazki then asked as to who she (Dani) is to dictate such things to the prosecutor’s office.

Petitioners’ lawyer N N Gawankar told the court that he did not have copy of order as the press report has said that it would be produced in court. Kadam admitted that there is negligence on the part of the officer but not enough for contempt proceedings.

Story continues below this ad

The court pointed out that the officers are the custodians of the document and remarked that such activities are dangerous.

The court reiterated its stand that this was being done to pressurise judges by creating public opinion.

“Should we work according to law or public opinion,” Justice Nazki asked. The court has directed the state to put their submissions by way of an affidavit by Monday.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement