The Supreme Court Friday sought an explanation from its own registry over the listing of an anticipatory bail matter after almost a year despite the court's order to list it in four weeks from issuing notice..A bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on September 19, 2019, had issued a notice on a plea seeking anticipatory bail returnable in four weeks..However, the matter got listed only on August 28 this year when the advocate for the petitioner informed the court that since there was no interim protection in terms of the order dated September 19, 2019, the petitioner was arrested and subsequently granted regular bail and thus, this petition had become infructuous..Though the court disposed of the plea as having become infructuous, it made note of the almost year-long delay in the listing of the case.."We are however troubled by the fact that while issuing notice on 19th September, 2019, we had made the order returnable in four weeks. The matter was of anticipatory bail. This is the first time the matter has seen the light of the day after almost a year", said a three-judge bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajay Rashtogi and Aniruddha Bose..The bench, thus, directed the registry to furnish an explanation on the administrative side as to why the matter was not listed as directed after four weeks, more so, as the matter was in the nature of anticipatory bail..Earlier a bench headed by Justice U U Lalit had sought an explanation from its registry to explain why the petition filed by businessman Vijay Mallya, who had sought review of its 2017 order holding him guilty of contempt of court for transferring USD 40 million to his children, was not listed before the court for the last three years..Read Order.http://theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Supreme-Court_Registry_Explanation-.pdf
The Supreme Court Friday sought an explanation from its own registry over the listing of an anticipatory bail matter after almost a year despite the court's order to list it in four weeks from issuing notice..A bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on September 19, 2019, had issued a notice on a plea seeking anticipatory bail returnable in four weeks..However, the matter got listed only on August 28 this year when the advocate for the petitioner informed the court that since there was no interim protection in terms of the order dated September 19, 2019, the petitioner was arrested and subsequently granted regular bail and thus, this petition had become infructuous..Though the court disposed of the plea as having become infructuous, it made note of the almost year-long delay in the listing of the case.."We are however troubled by the fact that while issuing notice on 19th September, 2019, we had made the order returnable in four weeks. The matter was of anticipatory bail. This is the first time the matter has seen the light of the day after almost a year", said a three-judge bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajay Rashtogi and Aniruddha Bose..The bench, thus, directed the registry to furnish an explanation on the administrative side as to why the matter was not listed as directed after four weeks, more so, as the matter was in the nature of anticipatory bail..Earlier a bench headed by Justice U U Lalit had sought an explanation from its registry to explain why the petition filed by businessman Vijay Mallya, who had sought review of its 2017 order holding him guilty of contempt of court for transferring USD 40 million to his children, was not listed before the court for the last three years..Read Order.http://theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Supreme-Court_Registry_Explanation-.pdf
