As I mentioned yesterday, the ruling of HC and its observations are dubious since MHA was not even a party to the case. Passing observations without hearing the other side breaks basic norm of jurisprudence.
I'll not speculate on the judge in particular, however, this judgment and observations are unlikely to stand up to even the most basic scrutiny by the SC.
More over, if nautanki Kejru goes ahead on basic of this observations, most of those decisions would have to be rolled back too. So I hope he does go ahead.
Centre to challenge perverse HC order
Stunned by the Delhi high court's ruling slamming its May 21 notification on the LG's powers, the Centre will file a special leave petition in the Supreme Court challenging the judgment which it finds to be prime facie "perverse".
Senior government functionaries are baffled how the notification became the main talking point of the bail order issued by judge Vipin Sanghi. "
The home ministry was not even a party of the case and was never heard. However, given that the Delhi HC has passed observations against our notification, we have decided to challenge the ruling in Supreme Court," said a senior government official.
The Centre views the Delhi HC order as "perverse"
as the judge passed the order without hearing the party which had drafted and issued the notification.
The Centre is also baffled that
though the judge had reserved the order on the bail petition on May 20, he dwelt at length on a home ministry notification issued late on May 21. Further, the
judge questioned the competence of the Centre to pass laws in respect of matters dealt with in Entries 1 and 2 of List III of the Seventh Schedule (Concurrent List).
"However, as per the scheme of the Constitution, the Centre is not only entitled to make laws on subjects in the Concurrent List but where there is a conflict between the Centre and the state regarding the same, it is the former that takes precedence," an official said.
Some at the Centre also wondered
why the judge had written a detailed 37-page order on a bail plea, considering that orders in such cases mostly do not go beyond a few sentences. However, experts pointed out that a detailed judgment is not unusual where a point of law is being discussed. In this bail petition, the accused had challenged the jurisdiction of the anti-corruption branch to arrest him.
