The Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh wrote a letter on 6 October to the Chief Justice of India containing allegations against the acting Supreme Court Justice, Justice NV Ramana.
Attorney General KK Venugopal has said it is “open” for the Supreme Court to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy over his October 6 letter to the Chief Justice of India. containing accusations against Supreme Court Justice NV. Ramana.
“The crux of the alleged contempt lies in the content of the letter written by YS Jagan Mohan Reddy to the Chief Justice of India, and therefore the Supreme Court can address the matter of contempt suo motu as provided by the Law of Contempt for the Courts and the rules established therein, ”Mr. Venugopal wrote to Supreme Court attorney Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay on 7 November.
Mr. Venugopal was responding to Mr. Upadhyay’s request to reconsider his earlier refusal on November 2 to allow contempt action against Mr. Reddy and his Senior Adviser Ajeya Kallam for the letter and the act of releasing it at a conference. press conference held in October. 10.
Mr. Venugopal was firm in his decision to refuse consent. He reiterated that the CJI was already “aware of the matter” and that it would be inappropriate for him to give his consent and “impede the determination of the Chief Justice of India” on the matter.
Also read: A constitutional pickle of the Andhra type
The Attorney General wrote that contempt was a matter between the court and the contemner. No one could, as a right, insist on the initiation of a procedure for contempt.
However, Mr. Venugopal said that his refusal did not prevent Mr. Upadhyay from exercising his “right” to bring the matter directly to the judges for suo motu action.
“You can exercise this right through information posted on the administrative side or by bringing it to the attention of the court during the hearing of the case in which you are already a petitioner in person,” Mr. Venugopal wrote.
Mr. Upadhyay is the in-person petitioner in a case seeking speedy resolution of criminal cases against legislators across the country. He has alleged that Judge Ramana’s order of September 16 to try these cases quickly may have prompted Mr. Reddy to write the letter on October 6 and deliver it to the press a few days later. Also, Mr. Venugopal, in his previous reply on 2 November, agreed that the time of the letter was “suspicious”. In this context, the Attorney General referred to Mr. Upadhyay’s statement that Mr. Reddy had 31 criminal cases against him.
‘It is not a private letter’
In this second communication to Mr. Upadhyay on Saturday, Mr. Venugopal said, however, that the letter could not be described as a “private letter”.
“Nowhere is the letter marked confidential,” wrote the Attorney General.
Venugopal said he had seen the video of the October 10 press conference. During the event, nothing “more” was added other than what was said in the letter addressed to the Chief Justice.
.
