Judge Heading Commission of Inquiry Against Ex-CM KCR Resigns Following Supreme Court's Rebuke
In a significant development, Justice(Retired) L Narasimha Reddy told the Supreme Court that he was resigning as the head of the Commission of Inquiry constituted by the Telangana Government to probe into alleged irregularities in procuring power by the Government led by the previous Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao.
This development took place after the Supreme Court, while hearing a petition filed by K Chandrashekhar Rao, orally expressed disapproval of the press statements made by Justice Reddy, raising doubts that he has pre-judged the issue. When the Court asked the State Government to replace the judge, Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi requested time to seek instructions and the hearing was adjourned till 2 PM.
When the matter was taken again, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the former judge, conveyed his intention to resign.
Recording this development in the order, the bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra disposed of KCR's petition.
The Court was hearing a petition filed by K Chandrashekhar Rao challenging the notification issued by the new Congress-led Government in March this year constituting the Commission. He approached the Supreme Court after the Telangana High Court dismissed his challenge on July 2.
It may be noted that the one-man Commission of Inquiry was constituted to look into alleged irregularities arising out of power procurement during Rao's government between 2014 to 2023.
During the hearing, CJI expressed reservations about the Commission :
"Dr Singhvi, that press conference, had it just been indicating the modalities followed (like notice is issued etc) ....it is a little untoward for a person who is a judge. Had he not made certain observations on the merits of the issue we would have left it at that. The problem is that there appear observations on the merits. Let us also face it, it doesn't bind anybody but the inquiry report affects the reputation of a person"
CJI underscored that procedural fairness needed to be followed in the inquiry and that such fairness and 'Justice' should be visible in the conduct the head of the Commission as well.
"We are giving you (State Government) the opportunity to replace the judge in the commission of inquiry, appoint some other judge. Because there has to be an impression you know... justice must be seen to be done. He is the Commissioner of Inquiry, he has expressed his view on merit (in the press conference)."
Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for the State submitted that notice was issued to Rao along with several others on April 11 and Rao instead of challenging the notice sought time to reply till June end. The Commission had allowed his to file the reply by June 15.
Justice L Reddy was represented by Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan who contended that the allegation of bias is being levelled wrongly against Justice Reddy as he only disclosed that Rao had sought additional time to reply.
"If you look at the press note and compare with statements on record...this allegation is coming from one witness who has not responded, he is alleging bias by me (judge), I have said nothing except that he has asked for time"
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing KCR, submitted that the whole case was based on "political vendetta". "Every time the government changes there is a case against the former chief minister," he stated.
Case : KALVAKUNTLA CHANDRASHEKAR RAO Vs THE STATE OF TELANGANA |SLP(C) No. 14727/2024