Prashant Bhushan Writes To SC Registry Alleging Irregularities In Listing Of UAPA Pleas Before Justice Bela Trivedi

Advocate Prashant Bhushan has written to the Registrar of the Supreme Court, against the 'arbitrary' listing of a batch of matters before a bench led by Justice Bela Trivedi. The cases challenge the invocation of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) against journalists and lawyers regarding their fact-finding report on Tripura riots. 

 The batch of matters also consists of pleas challenging the provisions of the UAPA. Bhushan has said  that the matter ought to have been listed before a bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, and has requested the registry to rectify the "arbitrary" listing of the matter before Justice Trivedi's bench. 

On 29th November, when the matter came up before the bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, along with Umar Khalid's bail plea, Bhushan had orally requested the matter to be listed before the appropriate bench. Umar Khalid has also filed a separate writ petition challenging UAPA provisions. Bhushan pointed out that the petitions were being heard by a bench led by the Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, and requested Justice Trivedi to place the matter before the CJI on the administrative side for clarity.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for the Foundation of Media Professionals had also requested that the petitions challenging the UAPA provisions be referred to a three-judge bench. 

In his letter to the Registry (Listing), Bhushan has pointed out that when the main plea (Mukesh V State of Tripura, WP (Crl) 470/2021) seeking to quash the FIRs under the UAPA was first listed in 2021, before a bench led by then Chief Justice Ramana, and consisting of Justice Chandrachud, notice was issued and interim protection against coercive action was granted. Subsequently similar matters were tagged along with it, wherein the bench presided over by Justice Chandrachud had passed substantive orders. This batch of matters also included pleas challenging the UAPA.

Later, on October 18th 2023, when a fresh plea challenging the constitutional validity of Section 15(a) and Section 18 of the UAPA came up before a bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela Trivedi, the bench directed the matter to be tagged along with Mukesh V State of Tripura, WP (Crl) 470/2021. Despite this order, on 31.10.2023, the entire batch of matters came to be listed before Justice Aniruddha Bose  and Justice Bela Trivedi, Bhushan states in his letter. The matter was then directed to be listed before the appropriate bench. 

However, on 29.11.2023, the batch of matters were listed before a bench led by Justice Trivedi. Bhushan has said that this listing is arbitrary and against the Handbook on Practice & Procedure and Office Procedure on judicial side based on the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. The letter states that pending matters are to be listed before the senior presiding judge and are listed before the puisne judge only if the senior presiding judge is unavailable. 

Bhushan has requested the Registry to pass appropriate orders after taking instructions from the CJI to rectify the error in listing before the next date of hearing. The matter is next listed on 10.01.2024. 

Recently, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave wrote an open letter to CJI DY Chandrachud complaining of irregularities in the listing of 'sensitive' matters. Dave said that many matters, particularly politically sensitive cases, were shifted to certain benches in violation of the listing rules.