The Supreme Court on Thursday made stinging criticism against the lawyers who represented the petitioners seeking an independent probe into judge BH loya’s death.
Though the court was of the view that the petitioners/interveners were liable to face criminal contempt for shunning objectivity and misrepresenting facts, the Bench refused to go that far. Nevertheless, it highlighted the conduct of each lawyer who appeared for the petitioners.
About lawyer Prashant Bhushan, the court noted that he held a “dual mantle” as a lawyer appearing for an intervener and as member of Centre for Public Interest litigation, one of the intervening organisations.
The Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud commented on how Bhushan showed individual personal interest in the case by personally collecting evidence, in the form of medical opinion from doctors, to bolster the case. The Bench observed, “The manner in which the opinion of Dr Kaul was obtained on the basis of a laconic questionnaire leaves much to be desired and is a singular reflection on the lack of objectivity which is to be expected from counsel appearing before this court.”