DEMONETISATION Valid Or Not? : Supreme Court Constitution Bench Hearing- LIVE UPDATES

Chidambaram: Let them show the documents! 

Chidambaram: In the affidavit, they have stated that the mere fact that the documents in question are not in the public domain, does not entitle the petitioners to seek any relief.

Chidambaram: The word 'old' which was in the original affidavit is missing in the recent affidavit. Also, that the roles of RBI and govt were reversed is evident from the GoI's affidavit.

Chidambaram: The affidavit does not disclose who was present, who was absent, whether quorum was there, what were the terms of the resolution, nothing.

Chidambaram: Also, old bank notes?!

All these momentous decisions were made in around two hours? How is that possible? This is the most outrageous decision-making process which makes a mockery of the rule of law. It must be struck down.

Chidambaram: Financial inclusion and incentivising, digitisation, moving to a cashless economy, etc. cited here, were not the govt's objectives. In the govt's affidavit, it was not disclosed that some consultation was going on for months.

Chidambaram also draws the attention of the court to the RBI's counter-affidavit.

"There was nothing disclosed about the contents of the letter or the recommendations,"

Chidambaram: Those are my propositions. Now I will wind up by taking you through case laws.

Chidambaram: My next proposition is that the power to declare the law without granting relief is given under Aa 32, 141, 142. If you hold demonetisation was illegal, this will give caution to the govt and circumscribe them in the future.

Bench ponders the importance of the submissions, other than the one on the scope of S26(2).

Chidambaram: My main submissions are that S26(2) did not confer this power, and that this power cannot be exercised in such an unguided & opaque way.