E-Paper
SC asks restraint from Telangana CM, questions remarks on judiciary
SC’s remarks came during a brief hearing on a petition seeking transfer of a criminal case against Reddy outside Telangana
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday emphasised that individuals in high offices must exercise greater restraint and avoid dragging judges and lawyers into their statements, as it sought an explanation from Telangana chief minister Revanth Reddy on some of the contentious comments attributed to Reddy and the Telangana Congress, casting aspersions on the judiciary.
A bench comprising justices Bhushan R Gavai and KV Viswanathan expressed concern over the CM’s remarks, saying: “Why do you have to drag courts and lawyers into all this... When someone holds such a high office, a greater degree of restraint is expected.”
The court’s remarks came during a brief hearing on a petition seeking transfer of a criminal case against the Congress leader outside Telangana. The bench advised Reddy to treat the court’s observations with “sensitivity” and granted him two weeks to respond to an application filed by a group of Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leaders, acknowledging that the CM might have been occupied with managing floods in the state. “We are sensitive to everything. You should also be sensitive to what we said,” the bench remarked to senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi and Sidharth Luthra, who represented Reddy.
Facing intense scrutiny from the Supreme Court for his comments concerning the grant of bail to BRS leader K Kavitha in the Delhi excise policy case, Reddy issued a public statement of regret on Friday.
On Thursday, the top court reprimanded him during a hearing on a petition related to the 2015 cash-for-vote case, which sought to transfer the trial outside Telangana. The bench was visibly displeased with Reddy’s insinuation that a political arrangement between the BRS and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) might have influenced the Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail to Kavitha.
The court questioned whether the CM’s comments implied that the Supreme Court’s decisions, including the grant of relief to Kavitha, were influenced by political considerations. “Do we decide on political considerations?” justice Gavai asked, noting the seriousness of the CM’s insinuations.
Initially inclined to dismiss the petition for transferring the trial, the court reconsidered its position after learning of the CM’s remarks, which it deemed inappropriate for someone in his position. “We are not foreclosing the issue of transfer (of the case)... Should such statements be made by a responsible chief minister of a state? If such is the sort of statements he is making, that may rightly bring apprehensions in the minds of any person that the trial against him can be influenced,” the bench remarked.
In a statement on Friday, Reddy said: “I have the highest regard and full faith in the Indian judiciary. I understand that certain press reports dated 29th August 2024 containing comments attributed to me have given the impression that I am questioning the judicial wisdom of the honourable court. I reiterate that I am a firm believer in the judicial process. I unconditionally express my regret for the statements reflected in the press reports. The remarks attributed to me in such reports have been taken out of context. I have unconditional respect & highest regard for the judiciary & its independence. As a firm believer in the Constitution of India and its ethos, I have and continue to hold the judiciary in its highest esteem.”
Reddy’s controversial comments arose in the context of the 2015 cash-for-vote scandal, where he, then an MLA of the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), allegedly offered a ₹50 lakh bribe to secure a favorable vote in a legislative election.
The transfer petition in the Supreme Court has been filed by Guntakandla Jagadish Reddy, a former minister in the state, along with former Telangana deputy chief minister Mohammad Mahmood Ali, former minister Satyavathi Rathod and MLA Kalvakuntla Sanjay.
