SC to hear pleas of Karnataka ACB, its ADGP against adverse HC remarks

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday agreed to hear an appeal of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) ADGP Seemanth Kumar Singh of Karnataka challenging certain adverse remarks made by the high court against him and the ACB during the hearing of a bail plea in connection with a bribery case. A bench comprising Chief Justice N V Ramana and justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli took note of the submissions of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Karnataka ACB, seeking urgent listing of the plea.

“This is a matter where in a bail hearing, a single judge bench of the Karnataka High Court has taken various issues. We have been asked to file all… summary reports. Several observations have also been made. It requires an urgent hearing,” the law officer said.

The top court agreed to list the plea for hearing on Tuesday.

A separate appeal on behalf of the ADGP was also mentioned for hearing.

”The Judge has said that you are going to threaten him and you are an influential officer,” the bench told the counsel for the officer.

Earlier, the ACB ADGP had moved the Karnataka High Court seeking to expunge the remarks made by the single judge against him and the state anti-graft bureau during the hearing of a bail petition in connection with a bribery case.

The ADGP, in his plea to the high court, had recalled the remarks of Justice H P Sandesh calling the ACB a ”collection centre” and Singh its head a ”tainted officer”.

”The petitioner is deeply hurt by the oral observations made by the learned single judge which has caused a severe dent to the reputation of the petitioner and also that of the ACB,” the petition had said.

It had all begun with, Singh, a senior IPS officer being asked to be personally present before Justice Sandesh on May 30 during the hearing of the bail petition of Deputy Tahsildar Mahesh P S, who was working in the Urban Deputy Commissioner’s (DC’s) office when an ACB raid had resulted in the bribery case.

The high court had questioned why then DC Manjunath was not made an accused in the case, following which the court was promised he would be made a party in the case.

On June 29, during the next hearing of the case, Justice Sandesh on noticing the DC was not yet made a party, made observations against ACB and the ADGP.

On July 4, Singh was again present in the court, during which the judge stated that he was threatened with the transfer after his remark against the ACB that it had become a ”collection centre”, and that he was unfazed by such threats.

Singh in his petition had said, the judge asked for his service records to be submitted and there were negative remarks in it.

”The learned single judge has also stated that the petitioner is apparently powerful and has made several other unwarranted and baseless statements,” the petition had said.

Singh’s petition had sought a stay on the order of Justice Sandesh calling for his service records as it was beyond the scope of the bail petition the court was hearing.

He had also sought to expunge the oral observations made by the judge which he says were widely reported in the media and dented his image.