AG KK Venugopal declines consent for contempt against YS Jaganmohan Reddy

[Justice_Chowdary]

25 minutes ago, RSUCHOU said:

Quid pro quo is defined as a favour or advantage granted in return for something. If that is what you mean, then the culprit here would be YSR and his cabinet, not Jagan. Jagan did not hold a constitutional or political post during the time of these deals. So, how is he liable? It is the same argument against Ramana's daughters. They benefited from the position their dad holds. The accusation is that Ramana colluded with CBN who gave him the insider information in return. If people did favours to Jagan in lieu of the favours they got from YSR and it is wrong, why would you not rate the Ramana case in the same way? Is it because you are sympathetic to Ramana & CBN? The only cases that might stick on Jagan, if at all are the ED cases for money laundering. The maximum anyone has been punished with is a monetary fine. The total number of convictions under PMLA until January 2020 is 14. Did you know that? And, the maximum term is 7 years. No one has been given a jail sentence so far. Given that all the ministers and government officials are exonerated from the CBI cases and ED cases are filed based on CBI cases, do you think Jagan would be proven Guilty? If you believe yes, Ramana also would be proven guilty.

16 months jail lo undhi vachina oka crimianl lajoduku ni intha la defend cheyadankiki, oka judge tho compare chesthunavu choodu, you are confimed Paytm batch

muusuko koorcha ra jaffa. nuvvu nee paragrapha paytm kastalu..

[Somedude]

26 minutes ago, RSUCHOU said:

Quid pro quo is defined as a favour or advantage granted in return for something. If that is what you mean, then the culprit here would be YSR and his cabinet, not Jagan. Jagan did not hold a constitutional or political post during the time of these deals. So, how is he liable? It is the same argument against Ramana's daughters. They benefited from the position their dad holds. The accusation is that Ramana colluded with CBN who gave him the insider information in return. If people did favours to Jagan in lieu of the favours they got from YSR and it is wrong, why would you not rate the Ramana case in the same way? Is it because you are sympathetic to Ramana & CBN? The only cases that might stick on Jagan, if at all are the ED cases for money laundering. The maximum anyone has been punished with is a monetary fine. The total number of convictions under PMLA until January 2020 is 14. Did you know that? And, the maximum term is 7 years. No one has been given a jail sentence so far. Given that all the ministers and government officials are exonerated from the CBI cases and ED cases are filed based on CBI cases, do you think Jagan would be proven Guilty? If you believe yes, Ramana also would be proven guilty.

Arey babu prima facie info unte provide chey. paragraphs kaadhu. Jaggu gaani cases lo undhi kabatte 16 months lo petti chippakoodu pettaru and trails again start avuthunnayi. Every Friday court ki vellali. That itself shows Jagga is in deep and he is going to go down more. Oka ardhika ugravadhi 33 cases unchukoni lower class nundi vacchi CJI range ki velle oka person meedha buradha challuthunte..dhaniki nuvvu support chesthu..nenu CBN/Ramana sympathetic antunnavu. That shows your state of mind.

[MiryalgudaMaruthiRao]

6 minutes ago, Somedude said:

Arey babu prima facie info unte provide chey. paragraphs kaadhu. Jaggu gaani cases lo undhi kabatte 16 months lo petti chippakoodu pettaru and trails again start avuthunnayi. Every Friday court ki vellali. That itself shows Jagga is in deep and he is going to go down more. Oka ardhika ugravadhi 33 cases unchukoni lower class nundi vacchi CJI range ki velle oka person meedha buradha challuthunte..dhaniki nuvvu support chesthu..nenu CBN/Ramana sympathetic antunnavu. That shows your state of mind.

pay 5 rs Anna we will support Dawood as well

[tom bhayya]

Is A-G's consent mandatory?

Taking the consent of the Attorney General is a condition precedent for initiating criminal contempt.

As per the Contempt of Court Act 1971, which lists out details of what qualifies as criminal contempt, the punishment, and method to follow, a court may take a criminal contempt case on its own motion or on a motion made by the Attorney General or any other person with the consent in writing of the Advocate-General.

When a criminal contempt plea is moved by a third person in the Supreme Court, permission has to be sought from the Attorney General or the Solicitor General of India. In case the criminal contempt case is filed in a high court, the law officer whose permission is to be sought is the Advocate-General of the State or any of the States for which the High Court has been established; whereas, in relation to the court of a judicial commissioner, it's the law officer as specified by the Central Government in the Official Gazette.

The requirement of permission for the Advocate General has been necessitated under Section 15 (1) b and Section 15 (2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1971 in all cases when a criminal contempt case is moved by a third person (in this case, Upadhyay).

As per Rule 3 stated in Part II of The Rules to Regulate Proceedings For Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975, in case of contempt, which is other than a contempt case taken place outside the view or presence or hearing of a court or pending, a court may take action: (a) suo motu, or (b) on a petition made by Attorney General, or Solicitor General, or (c) on a petition made by any person, and in the case of a criminal contempt with the consent in writing of the Attorney General or the Solicitor General.

The criminal contempt against Reddy and his advisor falls under the third category, and hence Upadhyay needs the Attorney General's consent to move the criminal contempt plea.

The way ahead

As Attorney General Venugopal stated in his response, the matter is already seized with CJI Bobde. And if CJI Bobde deems it fit, he can under Section 15 (1) of the Contempt of Court Act 1971, take action on its own.

As per Section 2 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, "criminal contempt" means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which:

(i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or
(ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or
(iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner.

According to Upadhyay's letter, the actions of these two individuals "scandalises" the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and constitute grave criminal contempt of the Supreme Court of India and the said high court.

Attorney General, in his response to Upadhyay's letter, also opined a similar view. He said that he is of the opinion that "the timing itself of the letter, as well as its being placed in the public domain through a press conference could certainly be said to be suspect, in the background of the order passed by Justice Ramana, directing pending prosecution of elected representatives to be taken up and disposed of expeditiously".

The Supreme Court has not initiated any suo motu contempt action against Reddy and his advisor, but as the Attorney General stated, the matter is seized with the CJI, and one would hope to get some clarity in the coming days.

Whatever be the action of the court, the current controversy will certainly have a long-lasting impact on the independence of the judiciary.

[RSUCHOU]

On 11/4/2020 at 11:00 PM, Somedude said:

Arey babu prima facie info unte provide chey. paragraphs kaadhu. Jaggu gaani cases lo undhi kabatte 16 months lo petti chippakoodu pettaru and trails again start avuthunnayi. Every Friday court ki vellali. That itself shows Jagga is in deep and he is going to go down more. Oka ardhika ugravadhi 33 cases unchukoni lower class nundi vacchi CJI range ki velle oka person meedha buradha challuthunte..dhaniki nuvvu support chesthu..nenu CBN/Ramana sympathetic antunnavu. That shows your state of mind.

Just because someone from modest means is going to be powerful doesn't make him less culpable. Secondly, primafacie evidence ni annexure lo submit chesaru. What to do with it is CJI's prerogative. You will have to understand, the complaints against Ramana and Andhra HC are made in the official capacity of Chief minister. Not as Jagan the individual. Whatever cases he is facing in his individual capacity has no bearing on the office of the Chief Minister of AP. In your bid to discredit an individual, you are discrediting one branch of the four estates. Indian law says, you are innocent until proven guilty. The same applies to Ramana and Jagan. As a bystander, I find it amusing that the entire Telugu media is trying to paint it as something against Ramana. It is not. I find it a fight between Executive Vs Judiciary. I am someone that always felt, Judiciary cannot play the supreme being. Policing the police is needed. No one arm is powerful than the other. For me this is a case against the arm and not an individual. If you cannot think beyond an individual, I have nothing further to add.

[RSUCHOU]

On 11/4/2020 at 10:55 PM, Justice_Chowdary said:

16 months jail lo undhi vachina oka crimianl lajoduku ni intha la defend cheyadankiki, oka judge tho compare chesthunavu choodu, you are confimed Paytm batch

muusuko koorcha ra jaffa. nuvvu nee paragrapha paytm kastalu..

Undertrail and criminal ki teda undi sir. If you have to align affiliations, because I hold a certain stance, be my guest. Whether it is Ramana or Jagan, both are equal in front of the law. I have seen far too many things happen in the Judiciary, that make it hard for me to believe it is sacrosanct. The eagerness you show to call an undertrail a criminal does give away your affiliation a little bit. You can call me anything you want. I am one of those rare extinct breed called a neutral bystander. So your labelling doesn't hurt me a bit. If you want to engage in name calling, you are barking up the wrong tree. Sorry.

[Justice_Chowdary]

14 hours ago, RSUCHOU said:

Undertrail and criminal ki teda undi sir. If you have to align affiliations, because I hold a certain stance, be my guest. Whether it is Ramana or Jagan, both are equal in front of the law. I have seen far too many things happen in the Judiciary, that make it hard for me to believe it is sacrosanct. The eagerness you show to call an undertrail a criminal does give away your affiliation a little bit. You can call me anything you want. I am one of those rare extinct breed called a neutral bystander. So your labelling doesn't hurt me a bit. If you want to engage in name calling, you are barking up the wrong tree. Sorry.

lol paytm dog.