New Delhi: A two-judge bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court has ordered for filing of a criminal case against a senior IAS officer who is considered to be the right-hand man of Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy.
The division bench judge, in its order has also raised the 11 corruption cases filed against the Andhra Chief Minister Reddy by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), six cases filed against Reddy by the Enforcement Directorate and the 18 different FIRs that have pending against him for years now.
The judgment stated that under the present government, “Firstly, attack was made on Legislative Council, thereafter another Constitutional body, i.e., State Election Commission; and, now the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and even the Supreme Court is under attack by persons, who are in power”.
The court of Justice Rakesh Kumar and Justice D. Ramesh were delivering their judgment on a recusal petition filed by Reddy government against Justice Rakesh Kumar.
The court said that IAS officer Pravin Kumar, Mission Director, Mission Build Andhra Pradesh, had failed to prove the charges he made against the judge in his affidavit. The IAS officer had sought the stepping down of Justice Rakesh Kumar claiming that he had made biased statements against the government. When the court insisted on proof of the judge’s comments, Praveen Kumar’s lawyer could not submit the paper cuttings or TV news clippings.
Thereafter, the High Court ordered its Registrar to file a case in the police station concerned against Praveen Kumar while also asking the IAS office to respond within 6 weeks as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him.
The court said that Pravin Kumar had committed the offence of perjury and the action of the state government by way of ‘filing the aforesaid petition, with untrue and false allegations amounts to interference in the discharge of judicial functions and as such the same is contemptuous’.
These developments have come after the Andhra government on 15 December filed a petition seeking the recusal of Justice Rakesh Kumar from hearing the bunch of petitions that were filed in the High Court against the government’s proposal to auction properties in Visakhapatnam, Guntur and other districts. A division bench comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar and Justice D Ramesh has been hearing them since 11 December. The said affidavit was filed just one day before of the next hearing on that was schedule for 17 December.
Referring to the affidavit, the HC said, “I perceived that bureaucrats of this State have been emboldened after apparent success of the Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State of Andhra Pradesh in addressing a letter to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India and making it public, making allegation against one of the senior Judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Hon’ble Chief Justice of A.P High Court and number of sitting Judges of A.P High Court with their name”.
In its detailed judgement, the court also mentioned about how the judges were being targeted on social media by politicians from the ruling party and despite repeated written complaints by the HC to the state police, no action was being taken against them. The court has stated about how tents were erected near the residence of the judges where acts were being done, including showing of black flags, to show ‘disrespect’ and ‘displeasure’ to the judges who are hearing this case. Despite a written complaint by the Registrar of the HC, no action was taken.
The court in its judgment stated that due to the conduct of judges, questions were being raised against the judiciary. “I am of the opinion that for a situation, which is prevailing, today in which impartiality, integrity, honesty, unbiased etc., in judicial system is being raised, to some extent we are also responsible. Several instances we have noticed that immediately after demitting the office of Judge, the Judges are provided with new assignment. If we start to restrict our expectation of reassignment/re-employment at least for a period of one year after retirement, I don’t think that any political party, even party in power can undermine the independence of judiciary and we may be in a position to uphold the majesty of law without being influenced by any one”.
