Gauhati High Court Refuses To Condone Delay For Appeal Against Setting Aside Of Justice Saikia Inquiry Commission Report On 'Secret Killings'
The Gauhati High Court on Monday refused to entertain an application for condonation of delay of 531 days in filling of an appeal against a Single Bench ruling that declared the constitution of Justice (Retd.) K.N. Saikia Commission, which inquired into the alleged ‘secret killings’ of unidentified relatives of alleged ULFA militants between 1998-2001, as invalid.Consequently, the court...
The Gauhati High Court on Monday refused to entertain an application for condonation of delay of 531 days in filling of an appeal against a Single Bench ruling that declared the constitution of Justice (Retd.) K.N. Saikia Commission, which inquired into the alleged ‘secret killings’ of unidentified relatives of alleged ULFA militants between 1998-2001, as invalid.
Consequently, the court also dismissed the appeal. Saikia Commission in its report in 2007 had indicted former Assam Chief Minister Prafulla Kumar Mahanta.
The division bench of the Chief Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Mitali Thakuria observed that not only have the applicants failed to convincingly explain the gross delay of 531 days occasioned in filing of the appeal but they have also made inconsistent and contradictory pleadings in the three affidavits.
“Thus, we are of the view that the application for condonation of delay is not based on bonafide assertions and grounds and hence, the same does not merit acceptance. As a consequence, the I.A.(Civil) No.1778/2021 is dismissed as being devoid of merit,” the court said.
The appeal and interlocutory application for the condonation of delay of 531 days were filed by Ananta Kalita, alleged victim, and Rajya Sabha MP Ajit Kumar Bhuyan. They were represented by Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves.
It was argued that applicants were not party to the case filed by Prafulla Kumar Mahanta before the Single Judge and were thus unaware of the proceedings of the writ petition or its result. The court was also informed that, before approaching the High Court, the applicants had approached the Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) with the same cause of action but the plea was withdrawn with liberty to approach the High Court.
The counsel appearing for Mahanta submitted that Bhuyan was a renowned journalist at the relevant point of time and since 2020, he is a sitting member of Rajya Sabha from Assam and hence, the plea of ignorance taken by the applicants in support of the prayer for condonation of delay is totally unconvincing and untenable.
The court in the ruling said from the pleadings of the application it is crystal clear that the litigation “seems to be sponsored” by Bhuyan, “who is a well-known journalist of yesteryears and presently is a serving Rajya Sabha Member.”
“Copies of the newspaper reports which have been annexed with the affidavits of the respondent No.1 make it clear that the information regarding the judgment dated 03.09.2018 rendered by the learned Single Bench was published extensively and the publications continued over a prolonged period. Thus, the plea put forth by the applicants regarding they not being aware of the impugned order is absolutely false and thus, unacceptable,” said the court
The court further noted that applicants directly approached the Supreme Court for assailing the order rendered by the single bench. It added that when SLP was withdrawn, “no prayer was made on behalf of the applicants to seek any leniency on condonation of delay in filing the writ appeal in this Court.”
Case Title: Shri Ananta Kalita & Shri Ajit Kumar Bhuyan v. Shri Prafulla Kumar Mahanta & 8 Ors.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Gau) 68
Appearances: Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves for the applicants; Advocate R. Barua for Prafulla Kumar Mahanta; M. Bhattacharjee (Additional Senior Government Advocate) and Advocate B. Bora for other respondents respectively.