CBI feud vitiated work environment of agency: Government
New Delhi, Oct 24: The government Wednesday claimed that ousted CBI Director Alok Verma was not cooperating with the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and defended its decision to send him on leave, saying that an "extra-ordinary and unprecedented" situation had arisen due to "grave allegations of corruption" against senior functionaries of the agency.
The environment of faction feud in the CBI has reached its peak, leading to a potential loss of its credibility and reputation of the premier investigating agency besides vitiating the work environment of the organization which has deep and visible impact on the overall governance.
In a long statement, the government said the CVC, on receipt of a complaint on August 24, 2018 containing various allegations against the senior functionaries of the CBI, has served three notices under Section 11 of the CVC Act, 2003 on September 11 on the CBI director to produce files and documents before the commission on September 14.
Various opportunities were given to produce such records and after several adjournments, the CBI assured the commission on September 24 of furnishing them within three weeks.
"Despite repeated assurances and reminders, the Director, CBI, failed to furnish the records/files before the commission. The CVC has observed that Director, CBI, has not been cooperating in making available records/files sought by the commission relating to serious allegations," the statement read.
The CVC has also observed that the CBI director has been non-cooperative, non-compliant with the requirements/directions and has created willful obstructions in the functioning of the commission which is a constitutional body.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
BCI urges CJI to take action against Andhra HC judge for sending young lawyer to 24-hour custody
New Delhi (PTI): The Bar Council of India on Wednesday sought the urgent intervention of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant following a "deeply disturbing" incident where a judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reportedly sent a young advocate to
24-hour judicial custody over a procedural lapse.
The Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson and senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra, in a formal representation, termed the conduct of Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao "grossly inappropriate" and "damaging to the confidence of the Bar".
“I most respectfully request your Lordship to kindly take immediate institutional cognizance of the matter and call for the video recording of the proceedings, the order passed, and the surrounding circumstances.
“I further request that appropriate administrative action may kindly be considered, including withdrawal of judicial work from the learned Judge pending review, his immediate transfer to some far off High Court, and his nomination for appropriate judicial training/orientation on court management, judicial temperament, Bar-Bench relations, and proportional exercise of contempt/judicial authority,” Mishra wrote.
This representation is made to preserve the “dignity, moral authority and public confidence of the judiciary”, he said, adding, “Judges command the highest respect not by fear, but by fairness, patience, restraint and constitutional humility”.
The communication urged the CJI to intervene at the earliest to ensure that the faith of Bar, particularly young advocates, in the protective and corrective role of the judiciary is restored.
The controversy stems from proceedings on May 5.
According to the BCI, a video circulating online shows Justice Rao rebuking a young advocate who was unable to produce a specific order copy during a hearing.
The letter said that despite the advocate "repeatedly seeking pardon and mercy" and claiming he was in physical pain, the judge remained "unmoved".
The judge allegedly told the lawyer, "now you will learn," and mocked his experience before directing the Registrar and police personnel to take him into custody for 24 hours.
The BCI chairperson said that the judge’s actions lacked proportionality and fairness.
"The dignity of the court is not enhanced when a lawyer is made to beg for grace in open court and is still sent to custody for a procedural lapse," the letter said.
"A young lawyer... is an officer of the Court, still learning, still growing, and entitled to correction without humiliation," it added.
The bar body said that such actions create a "chilling effect" on the legal fraternity, particularly among junior members, and undermine the mutual respect required between the Bench and the Bar.
