Terming the death of special CBI judge BH loya to be a “serious” issue, the Supreme Court on Monday decided to objectively examine every document produced by the State and petitioners to allay apprehensions of foul play, and even restrained High Courts across the country to entertain any PIl on the same issue. The SC also asked petitioners not to cast aspersions as on date records suggested that loya died a natural death.
The court transferred to itself the two PIls pending before the Bombay High Court in this connection and fixed the matter for hearing on February 2. As is the practice, usually the Supreme Court does not withdraw to itself a petition on an issue pending before a HC unless the issue has been filed in more than one HC. Though petitioners urged the court to allow the Bombay HC to go ahead with the hearing, the SC went by the State’s argument that the matters to be settled by the top court of the country.
This was the first time a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra heard the matter after Justice Arun Mishra recused himself from the case.
As the two PIls filed by Congress spokesperson Tehseen Poonawala and journalist BR lone were taken up for hearing, senior advocate Dushyant Dave, who appeared for the Bombay lawyers Association before the Bombay HC, alleged that the State had not submitted the entire set of documents to the court. He claimed to have obtained a set of documents under the Right to Information Act and sought permission to present it to the court in a sealed cover.
Senior advocate Harish Salve, who represented Maharashtra, produced a report presented by the Maharashtra DGP, who enquired into the case on prior permission from the Bombay HC Chief Justice.
In this report, statements of judicial officers present with judge loya were recorded testifying that he died of a massive cardiac arrest on December 1, 2014.
Dave alleged conflict of interest against Salve for having appeared for BJP president Amit Shah, an accused in the Sohrabuddin case and now representing the BJP-ruled Maharashtra. Alleging that the entire “institution” was out to protect Shah, Dave pointed out serious inconsistencies in the records presented by the State and hinted at a larger conspiracy that could possibly be at work to save Shah. According to him, within a month after loya died, the BJP president was discharged from the case on December 30, 2014. The SC, however, asked Dave not to cast aspersions as on date records suggested that loya died a natural death.
Hurt by Dave’s diatribe alleging conflict of interest, Salve hit back at the former saying, “Only some people are concerned about the death while there are some who are using the death of a judge for other reasons.”
As allegations flew thick and fast, the Bench, also comprising Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, intervened and asked Dave to lower his voice.
Justice Chandrachud assured both sides of a fair hearing. Speaking for the SC Bench, he said, “We are looking into the circumstances that led to a district judge’s death which is a serious issue. let us look at the matter with a sense of objectivity and not allow the real issue to be deflected by arguments of conflict of interest. Each of you is the judge of his own conscience. We like to see every record and won’t restrict our attention to only those records produced by state.”
The court asked both the parties to file documents in sealed cover. When Salve requested that the documents should not be shared with anyone other than lawyers, senior advocate Indira Jaising, who wished to intervene on behalf of a group of civil servants, termed it as a “gag order” against media. She was rebuffed by the CJI, who said it was only a suggestion and the court was yet to pass an order. She withdrew her statement at the instance of the Bench.