Dave: In fact there is greater onus on him to be responsibly. I am not saying that dismiss it on merits. I am saying let it go to the trial court, but it doesn’t require discretion under 136.
Dave: These are uncalled for statements. Are they not attempting to bring in hatred and disaffection. If he was an ordinary citizen, he would not have been heard for a second, but because he’s an MP, he can get away with it.
Dave: It’s not so simple. He’s making statements to beat up COVID volunteers and stroking hatred in the name of religion and caste.
Dave: This is a judgment of a Constitution Bench and series of judgments have followed this. Now, coming to sedition, please turn to 124A.
Dave: I can understand if the HC has applied its mind. It’s only in Arnab Goswami or a case like this that people go to the SC. It’s an exceptional cases.
Dave: Don’t shut your eyes to injustice, but don’t open them too wide.
Bench: On the lighter side, anticipatory bail cases are coming here everyday.
Dave: He has been told to go to the competent Court. There has been no miscarriage of justice, let alone grave. The only exceptional thing here is that he is an MP and that he has the money that Rohatgi offered plane to Delhi for medical examination.
Dave refers to a 1986 Supreme Court judgment.
Dave: “It may however be pointed out that this Court was never intended to be a regular Court of Appeal, it was supposed to be an Apex Court for laying down the law”.
Dave reads out the transcript of the statements made by Raju while he was travelling to Guntur.
Dave: Is this what he should do when he’s under protection of Supreme Court of India ? This is the kind of behaviour he’s exhibiting.
Bench: Is this video correct ?
Rao: The video is incorrect. He was with the Sub-inspector. It was only because he was moved after 6.30.
Dave: Only because he’s an MP !