Top Stories

Supreme Court: Supreme Court told Jharkhand High Court, decide the maintainability of the petition against CM Soren

May 24, 2022
Bharat Times

Summary

The Supreme Court said that the Jharkhand High Court itself has said in one of its orders that first it will be decided whether the petition is maintainable or not and after that the allegations made in the petition will be dealt with in accordance with the law.

hear the news

The Jharkhand High Court is hearing a PIL seeking a probe against Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren for alleged irregularities in the allocation of mining leases. In this case, the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the High Court to first hear the preliminary objections on the maintainability of the petition. The plea has also sought a probe into the transactions of some shell companies which were allegedly run by Soren’s relatives and associates.

A vacation bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Bela M Trivedi said that the High Court itself, in its May 13 order, has said that it will first decide whether the petition is maintainable or not and after that the allegations made in the petition will be dealt with. . This PIL has been filed by Shiv Kumar Sharma. The bench said that we are of the view that the High Court should first consider the preliminary objections to the maintainability of the petition.

Sibal raised questions on the history of the petitioner
The Supreme Court also clarified that our remarks are not on the merits of the case and the allegations made in the petition have not been settled. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Jharkhand government, submitted that the petitioner Sharma has suppressed material facts that he has been filing several PILs against Chief Minister Hemant Soren. He also referred to the decisions of the Jharkhand High Court in the year 2010 on Public Interest Litigations.

Sibal said that on May 17, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had submitted an affidavit in a sealed cover in a petition by Sharma. The ED had said that they have found some material which is the subject matter of the PIL. Sibal told the bench that the question is whether any extraneous material brought in a sealed cover of any other matter relating to PIL can be brought before the court. Can the High Court look into this?

Material related to the petition was found in the raid of ED
To this the bench said that whatever the High Court proposes to do in the PIL, even if it considers that the petitioner is not genuine, it may take suo motu cognizance of the matter. At the same time, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, said that some observations have been made but an affidavit has been filed by the ED as some material was found during raids in some other FIR registered in 2012. which is the subject of public interest litigation.

He said that notices were issued to ED and CBI and hence he appeared before the High Court. Mehta informed about the seizures made in the raid against IAS officer Pooja Sinhal, who was then the state mining secretary. These raids were conducted by the ED in connection with 15 FIRs registered in 2012 related to misappropriation of money under MGNREGA scheme in Khunti district. Materials related to allotment of mining leases and sending money to shell companies were found during the raids.

Expansion

The Jharkhand High Court is hearing a PIL seeking a probe against Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren for alleged irregularities in the allocation of mining leases. In this case, the Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the High Court to first hear the preliminary objections on the maintainability of the petition. The plea has also sought a probe into the transactions of some shell companies which were allegedly run by Soren’s relatives and associates.

A vacation bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Bela M Trivedi said that the High Court itself, in its May 13 order, has said that it will first decide whether the petition is maintainable or not and after that the allegations made in the petition will be dealt with. . This PIL has been filed by Shiv Kumar Sharma. The bench said that we are of the view that the High Court should first consider the preliminary objections to the maintainability of the petition.

Sibal raised questions on the history of the petitioner

The Supreme Court also clarified that our remarks are not on the merits of the case and the allegations made in the petition have not been settled. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Jharkhand government, submitted that the petitioner Sharma has suppressed material facts that he has been filing several PILs against Chief Minister Hemant Soren. He also referred to the decisions of the Jharkhand High Court in the year 2010 on Public Interest Litigations.

Sibal said that on May 17, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had submitted an affidavit in a sealed cover in a petition by Sharma. The ED had said that they have found some material which is the subject matter of the PIL. Sibal told the bench that the question is whether any extraneous material brought in a sealed cover of any other matter relating to PIL can be brought before the court. Can the High Court look into this?

Material related to the petition was found in the raid of ED

To this the bench said that whatever the High Court proposes to do in the PIL, even if it considers that the petitioner is not genuine, it may take suo motu cognizance of the matter. At the same time, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the ED and the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, said that some observations have been made but an affidavit has been filed by the ED as some material was found during raids in some other FIR registered in 2012. which is the subject of public interest litigation.

He said that notices were issued to ED and CBI and hence he appeared before the High Court. Mehta informed about the seizures made in the raid against IAS officer Pooja Sinhal, who was then the state mining secretary. These raids were conducted by the ED in connection with 15 FIRs registered in 2012 related to misappropriation of money under MGNREGA scheme in Khunti district. Materials related to allotment of mining leases and sending money to shell companies were found during the raids.