Challenge To Anand Mohan's Remission : Bihar Govt Expresses Reluctance To Share Records With Petitioner; Says Will Submit Only To Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Friday(Aug 11) allowed the Bihar Government to file a further affidavit with regard to the remission granted to former MP who was serving a life term in the 1994 murder case of then Gopalganj District Magistrate G. Krishnaiah. The bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Dutta was hearing a petition filed by Umadevi, the widow of Krishniah, challenging...
The Supreme Court on Friday(Aug 11) allowed the Bihar Government to file a further affidavit with regard to the remission granted to former MP who was serving a life term in the 1994 murder case of then Gopalganj District Magistrate G. Krishnaiah.
The bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Dutta was hearing a petition filed by Umadevi, the widow of Krishniah, challenging the remission granted to Mohan and a recent modification in Bihar's prison Manual, which facilitated his early release . The case has been scheduled for its next hearing on September 26, 2023.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, assisted by Advocate-on-Record Tanya Sree, appearing for Uma Krishnaiah, requested access to the original records pertaining to the remission process.
It was met with resistance from Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar for the state of Bihar, who emphasized that the records would only be submitted to the court for its perusal. While issuing notice on the petition on May 19, the Court had directed the State to produce the original records.
Sr Adv Luthra questioned the secrecy surrounding the records. The State's counsel denied that there was any secrecy and said that the petitioner can apply under the RTI Act.
When Luthra expressed anguish with what he described as "the State's belligerence" in denying access to the records, Kumar replied, “These are departmental files with notings. We would only submit to the court”.
Justice Surya Kant, presiding over the proceedings, intervened to suggest a potential solution, proposing that “you can apply under RTI and then we’ll see.”
Sr Adv Luthra expressed confidence that he would be able to obtain the records. He said, “It’s only the state which is belligerent not the counsel.”
In response to the ongoing dispute, Sr Adv Kumar requested that he’ll file a further affidavit, indicating a willingness to provide additional information. Justice Surya Kant directed him to file an affidavit within two weeks and also acceded to the request of the petitioner to file a rejoinder due one week thereafter.
Earlier, the State had filed a counter-affidavit defending its decision.
Case Title: Telugu Umadevi Krishnaiah v. State of Bihar And Ors.
Citation: WP(Crl) No. 204/2023]