Justice Loya's death is sought to be politicised, Maharashtra govt. tells Supreme Court
The Maharashtra government on Friday said “apart from politics, there is nothing amiss in the death of Judge B.H. Loya”.
Appearing before a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for Maharashtra government, said the PIL petitions were politically motivated and intended to target BJP national president Amit Shah.
“These petitions are filed for extraneous petitions with oblique motive. The unfortunate death of judge Loya is sought to be politicised. They are activated by malice. Their real intention is not for a probe into the death of the judge. All their attention is one politician. In the guise of judicial independence, they are shedding crocodile tears,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted in his rebuttal.
Mr. Rohatgi said the four judges who were present with Loya at the time of his death have already given hand-written statements as to how he died of a heart attack in the early hours of December 1, 2014. Medical records show that Loya could not be revived despite resuscitation. Post-mortem report revealed Loya was brought dead on way to the hospital.
Mr. Rohatgi submitted that the article in Caravan magazine was published last year within few months of the Supreme Court's dismissal of a PIL filed by Harsh Mander former IAS officer challenging the discharge of Amit Shah from the Soharabuddin encounter case.
Senior advocate Harish Salve, also for Maharashtra, warned the court to not order a probe as it would indirectly mean that the four subordinate judges who were with Loya during his death are conspirators in a murder.
“Is entire system is dancing to the tune of one man? if that is so, we should wind up our judiciary. See the kind of scurrilous allegations put on display in last few weeks. Did the judges who accompanied judge Loya in his last hours, bump him off? Are they guilty of murder? What is the degree of evidence available now? Are the judges who recorded their statement (before intelligence chief) so distrustful?” Mr. Salve argued.
Earlier on in the hearing, both advocates Prashant Bhushan and Indira Jaising urged the court to order an independent enquiry as the documents show apparent contradiction. The arguments will continue on March 12.
Appearing before a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for Maharashtra government, said the PIL petitions were politically motivated and intended to target BJP national president Amit Shah.
“These petitions are filed for extraneous petitions with oblique motive. The unfortunate death of judge Loya is sought to be politicised. They are activated by malice. Their real intention is not for a probe into the death of the judge. All their attention is one politician. In the guise of judicial independence, they are shedding crocodile tears,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted in his rebuttal.
Mr. Rohatgi said the four judges who were present with Loya at the time of his death have already given hand-written statements as to how he died of a heart attack in the early hours of December 1, 2014. Medical records show that Loya could not be revived despite resuscitation. Post-mortem report revealed Loya was brought dead on way to the hospital.
Mr. Rohatgi submitted that the article in Caravan magazine was published last year within few months of the Supreme Court's dismissal of a PIL filed by Harsh Mander former IAS officer challenging the discharge of Amit Shah from the Soharabuddin encounter case.
Senior advocate Harish Salve, also for Maharashtra, warned the court to not order a probe as it would indirectly mean that the four subordinate judges who were with Loya during his death are conspirators in a murder.
“Is entire system is dancing to the tune of one man? if that is so, we should wind up our judiciary. See the kind of scurrilous allegations put on display in last few weeks. Did the judges who accompanied judge Loya in his last hours, bump him off? Are they guilty of murder? What is the degree of evidence available now? Are the judges who recorded their statement (before intelligence chief) so distrustful?” Mr. Salve argued.
Earlier on in the hearing, both advocates Prashant Bhushan and Indira Jaising urged the court to order an independent enquiry as the documents show apparent contradiction. The arguments will continue on March 12.