The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed its strong displeasure over a police complaint filed against the members of the Election Committee (EC) constituted to conduct the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) elections.
Terming the police complaint as ‘absolutely unwarranted,’ the Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan ruled out any criminal prosecution against the EC members, saying that they were the ‘extended’ arms of the Court and acted bona fide without doubt.
The top court of the country made these observations, while hearing the SCBA election dispute as part of the SCBA vs BD Kaushik case, wherein it was considering the issues related to reforms in SCBA.
Initially, it passed a strongly-worded order against Senior Advocate Adish C Aggarwala, noting that his allegations were baseless and scandalous. The Bench further issued a warning to the Bar not to indulge in such mudslinging.
Subsequently, Aggarwala unconditionally withdrew his allegations. The Apex Court then decided not to pass any order on his comments.
During the course of hearing, Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria (member of the Election Committee constituted by the Court) submitted that recounting of votes for the post of President was carried out, which revealed some discrepancy due to bona fide calculation error, however, the result was not affected.
He further said that EC members were hurt by their branding as ‘cricket team of Vikas Singh’ (Senior Advocate and President-elect) and referred to the allegations levelled against the members by Senior Advocate Aggarwala, who also contested for the post of SCBA President.
Hansaria further apprised the Bench that a letter had been written to the SHO of a police station, accusing the EC members of criminal conduct and expressed the apprehension that police officials may pay them a visit tonight.
The Apex Court initially told Hansaria not to take anything uttered by Aggarwala seriously. However, it was seemingly perturbed at the mention of the letter to the SHO. Though it remarked in jest that the EC members were not known for getting scared by such things, the Bench eventually assured that they were officers of the Apex Court and the Court would ensure that nothing adverse happened to them on this count.
It said the Court had faith in the bona fides of the EC members, though they were appointed on the suggestions made by the Bar members. Voicing concerns about the allegations, the Bench said in the midst of such threatening and browbeating of Election Committee members, who would accept the task in the future.
Noting that it did not seem to be a case of hanky panky, the Bench praised the EC for doing a commendable job. The Court was thankful to them for acting like an independent tribunal, it added.
The Court said the task of the Election Committee was painful as the members had to keep their office work at bay for weeks to attend to election duties under strenuous conditions.
Senior Advocates Jitendra Madan Sharma and Mahalakshmi Pavani were the other members of the Election Committee.
The matter pertained to the recently-concluded SCBA elections. Some SCBA members filed complaints alleging irregularities in the conduct of the polls. They further alleged that bogus voting had taken place during the elections and accused the Apex Court-appointed Election Committee members of behaving in a biased manner.
On May 22, the Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan said that any member of the Bar having a grievance regarding irregularities in the SCBA elections could approach the Court with proper material. While ordering preservation of the relevant CCTV footage, it also expressed that the Court would examine any allegation of gross illegality, including impersonation of voters, if substantiated with evidence.
On May 23, the Bench indicated that it would set aside the elections if satisfied that the allegations have merit.
The Court was apprised on May 26 that allegations regarding discrepancy between the total number of votes recorded for the post of President and the number of ballots issued were correct. The Election Committee decided to recount the votes.
On its part, the Bench directed the Committee to conduct recounting for the post of President as well as Executive Members.