Justice Ramasubramanian Recuses From Hearing Abdul Nazir Maudani's Plea To Relax Bail Condition
Justice V. Ramasubramanian has recused from a hearing pertaining to the plea filed by Abdul Nazir Maudany, an accused in the Bengaluru and Coimbatore blasts cases, seeking permission to leave Bengaluru to return to his hometown in Kerala and stay there till the trial concludes.A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde on Monday directed for the matter to be listed before a Bench...
Justice V. Ramasubramanian has recused from a hearing pertaining to the plea filed by Abdul Nazir Maudany, an accused in the Bengaluru and Coimbatore blasts cases, seeking permission to leave Bengaluru to return to his hometown in Kerala and stay there till the trial concludes.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde on Monday directed for the matter to be listed before a Bench that does not include Justice Ramasubramanian.
On the last occasion, the bench had asked Maudani's counsel to ascertain if Justice Ramasubramanian had appeared for him as an advocate earlier, after the judge expressed a doubt regarding that.
Today, Senior Advocate Jayant Bhushan told the bench that as per his instructions, Justice Ramasubramanian has never represented Maudani as a lawyer.
In reply, Justice Ramasubramanian said that he has appeared for Maudani in a matter in the Madras High Court as an advocate, and cited the case number and the order date.
"My learned brother can't be wrong about this", CJI Bobde told Maudani's lawyer.
The matter pertains to a plea filed by Madani seeking relaxation of the bail conditions which had been imposed by the Apex Court while granting him bail on 11th July, 2014.
Karnataka Government, in a statement filed before the Court, objected to allowing Maudani to travel to Kerala saying that he might abscond with the help of anti-national elements.
Senior Advocate Jayant Bhushan, appearing on behalf of Madani, had submitted that they were seeking modification of the condition that Madani had to remain in Bengaluru. Further, the relaxation was being sought on the ground that the undertaking on the basis of which the bail condition survived had since lapsed and the trial had not been concluded even after six years.
The Application contends that Madani suffers from multiple ailments and his health condition is worsening. Additionally, ever since he was remanded to custody, he has been denied proper and timely treatment on account of which he has also lost total vision in his right eye.
The Applicant has argued also that the progress of case before Trial Court is crawling at a snail's pace and has been hampered on several occasions. The prosecution has miserably failed to adhere to schedule of trial which was also scuttled due to inability to bring witnesses in time. Madani has contended that there are no Presiding Officers in the trial at present, which indicates that the trial may not conclude soon.
The Applicant has further sought the relaxation on the ground that his father suffered a stroke and is in a partially paralyzed condition. Also, his presence is not required at this stage of the trial.
The Apex Court had in 2014 granted Madani bail till pendency of trial before the Additional City Civil Judge on grounds that he was an under-trial prisoner and had been in judicial custody for 4 years. It was submitted that he was suffering from ailments like diabetes, heart disease, etc.
The bail was granted in an SLP filed by Madani, challenging order of the Karnataka High Court. After confessions were made by suspect, T Nazir, a Lashkar-e-Taiba operative, linking Madani to the Bangalore blasts that had led to death of one person and injury to 20 others, Abdul Nasser Madani was named as the 31st accused in charge sheet filed by the police.