English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Supreme Court rejects probe in Judge Loya’s death, BJP triumphant

Published

8 years ago

on

Supreme Court rejects probe in Judge Loya's death, BJP triumphant

There is no merit in plea for a probe in Judge BH Loya’s death and it was an attempt to scandalise judiciary, ruled the Supreme Court on Thursday, April 19.

The Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud said that the petitions were a “veiled attempt to launch a frontal attack on the independence of the judiciary” and that “there is no reason to doubt the statements of sitting Judge.”

The bench also said that the “petitioners’ conduct prima-facie constitutes criminal contempt,” but the court “would spare them of any contempt action.”

The bench said that the death was due to natural causes, that there is “absolutely no merit” in the public interest litigation (PIL) petitions alleging foul play in his death and there will be no probe.

The court said the statements of the judges who were with Judge Loya at his time of death could not be doubted: “We can’t doubt the statements of the judicial officers who were with Loya.”

Also, “Documents placed on record and their scrutiny establishes that Judge Loya’s death was due to ‘natural cause’.”

Records say that Judge Loya – the special CBI judge overseeing the investigation of the Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter case in which BJP president Amit Shah was an accused – died of cardiac arrest in Nagpur in 2014. Shah was discharged from the case by Judge Loya’s successor in office.

Controversy over Judge Loya’s death arose following a report in Caravan magazine, which quoted his sister and father suggesting foul play and cover-up in the incident.

The Bombay Lawyers’ Association subsequently moved the Bombay High Court, seeking a probe in the matter. PILs were filed in the Supreme Court. The apex court transferred the petitions in Bombay HC to itself and heard all of them together.

CJI Dipak Misra referred to the Caravan report, mentioning Loya’s conversation with his wife. He said: “An attempt was made to scandalize this case.” He also referred to the evolution of the public interest litigation and how the PIL was misused, “which is a serious issue to look into.”

He said: “It is the duty of the court to look into the fact (as to) which PIL is genuine and which one is filed under the facade of political activity.”

The SC said PILs, which were meant to provide succour to the downtrodden and voiceless, have become a means to settle political and personal scores. It said the judiciary is unnecessarily being made to spend precious time looking into such PILs which leads to delay in giving justice in other cases.

The top court said the petitioners’ advocates Dushyant Dave, Indira Jaising and Prashant Bhushan launched a frontal attack on the judiciary by urging the SC to disbelieve the three judicial officers who accompanied Loya to Nagpur and stayed with him at a guest house, and who later said the judge died of a heart attack.

Justice Chandrachud observed that the petitioners used the Supreme Court and their PILs as platforms to malign the Bombay High Court judiciary and the judicial officers who were with Judge Loya at the time of his death. At one point, the petitioners even wanted to “cross-examine” the judges who were with Judge Loya on their statements that said he died of a cardiac arrest.

The judgment said the PILs were a “serious attack on the judiciary” and an attempt to “seriously scandalise” judges.

The petitioners created a facade that the PILs were meant to protect the independence of the judiciary by seeking a probe into the death of Judge Loya. The truth was that the petitioners wanted to sensationalise the death of a judge. The PILs were only a “veiled attempt to destroy the credibility of judiciary” with “scurrilous” claims.

Claims by petitioners that “one man” (Amit Shah) was controlling the judiciary was nothing but an attempt to undermine public faith in the judiciary and credibility of judicial process, the judgment said.

Justice Chandrachud said the petitioners should not use the courts to settle political scores. “Political rivalries should be settled in that great hall of democracy… Rule of law should not be reduced to a charade,” he observed.

The apex court said the petitioners’ claims and aspersions amounted to criminal contempt. But Justice Chandrachud said the court did not want to initiate contempt proceedings as judicial process should not be respected out of fear of contempt, but it is to be based on moral authority.

The court dismissed the Loya PILs, holding that there was no reasonable suspicion to show that Judge Loya’s death was unnatural.

BJP and Congress reactions

A triumphant BJP attacked the Congress, calling it the “invisible” hand behind the petitions and accusing it of trying to use the judiciary for “character assassination” of its BJP president Amit Shah.

BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra described the public interest litigations (PILs) seeking an independent probe into the death of Judge Loya as “political interest litigations”.

Patra noted that the Congress had held press conferences and its president Rahul Gandhi led a delegation of Opposition parties to the President seeking a probe. Patra said Gandhi should “apologise” and be ashamed” for his ”conspiracy” to target Shah and the Indian judiciary and democracy.

Patra tweeted, “The highest Court of the country throws out of window the lowest attempt to politicise the unfortunate heart attack of a Judge! No doubts on the veracity of the statements of the 4 judges, says the SC! While truth triumphs Rahul Gandhi loses face #SCslamsCongressOnLoya”

The Congress said that the Supreme Court judgment will raise more questions and leave many of them unanswered unless logical reasons were found in it.

“Dispassionate analysis of Loya judgment must await its full reasoning. But unless logical reasons found in it, it will raise more questions and leave many unanswered,” Congress spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi said on Twitter.

Singhvi said the apex court can remove suspicions only by dealing with them directly.

“Am prepared to accept a) heavy emphasis in SC Loya regarding veracity of accompanying judges b) anguish regarding scandalous arguments (c) initiation of contempt if it arises (d) provided it is accompanied by solid reasons rebutting the 7/8 suspicious circumstances raised. Absent that, above lamentations not enough,” he tweeted.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

Amit Shah counters delimitation concerns, says southern states to gain Lok Sabha seats

Amit Shah assures Parliament that southern states will gain Lok Sabha seats after delimitation, countering opposition criticism during the women’s reservation debate.

Published

4 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

Amit Shah

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday addressed concerns over the proposed delimitation exercise, asserting in the Lok Sabha that southern states will not lose representation but instead see an increase in their number of seats.

His remarks came during a heated debate linked to the implementation of women’s reservation, where opposition parties have raised fears that population-based delimitation could reduce the political weight of southern states.

Shah rejected these claims, calling them misleading, and said the proposed framework ensures fairness while expanding the overall strength of the Lok Sabha.

Seat count to rise with expansion of Lok Sabha

The government has indicated that the total number of Lok Sabha seats could increase significantly as part of the delimitation process. In this expanded House, the combined representation of southern states is expected to rise from 129 seats at present to around 195 seats.

Shah emphasised that no state will lose seats in absolute terms, and the exercise is designed to reflect population changes while maintaining balance across regions.

State-wise projections shared in Parliament

During his address, Shah also provided indicative figures for individual southern states, suggesting notable increases in representation. According to the projections:

  • Tamil Nadu could see its seats rise substantially
  • Kerala, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh are also expected to gain additional seats
  • Karnataka’s representation may increase as well

These figures were presented to counter the argument that delimitation would disproportionately favour northern states.

Political debate intensifies over linkage with women’s quota

The delimitation exercise has been closely linked to the rollout of women’s reservation, which proposes one-third seats for women in Parliament and state assemblies.

Opposition leaders have questioned this linkage, arguing that tying reservation to delimitation could delay its implementation and raise federal concerns. Some leaders have also warned that the move could impact national unity if apprehensions among states are not addressed.

The government, however, maintains that the reforms are necessary to ensure equitable representation and to align the electoral system with demographic realities.

Centre dismisses ‘false narrative’ on southern states

Shah reiterated that concerns about southern states losing influence are unfounded. He said the delimitation process will increase representation across regions and described the criticism as a “false narrative” aimed at creating confusion.

The issue is expected to remain a key flashpoint as Parliament continues discussions on the women’s reservation framework and related legislative changes.

Continue Reading

India News

PM Modi assures no discrimination in women’s quota, delimitation debate intensifies in Parliament

PM Narendra Modi has assured that women’s reservation will be implemented without discrimination, amid a heated debate over delimitation in Parliament.

Published

11 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

PM modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has assured that there will be no discrimination in the implementation of women’s reservation, as Parliament witnessed a sharp debate over the proposed linkage between the quota and delimitation exercise.

During the ongoing special session, the government reiterated its commitment to ensuring fair representation while addressing concerns raised by opposition parties regarding the timing and structure of the legislation.

The proposed framework aims to reserve 33 percent of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. However, its implementation is tied to a fresh delimitation exercise, which is expected after the next census.

Opposition questions timing and intent

Opposition leaders have raised concerns that linking the women’s quota to delimitation could delay its implementation. They argue that the process of redrawing constituencies may push the actual rollout further into the future.

The issue has triggered a broader political confrontation, with multiple parties questioning whether the move could alter representation across states.

Some critics have also alleged that the delimitation exercise could disproportionately benefit certain regions based on population, a charge the government has rejected.

Government reiterates commitment to fair implementation

Responding to these concerns, the Centre has maintained that the reforms are necessary to ensure accurate and updated representation based on population data.

Leaders from the ruling side have repeatedly emphasized that the process will be carried out transparently and without bias. The assurance that there will be “no discrimination” is aimed at addressing fears among states and opposition parties.

The debate marks a key moment in Parliament, with both sides engaging in intense exchanges over one of the most significant electoral reforms in recent years.

Continue Reading

India News

Give all tickets to Muslim women, Amit Shah says, attacking Akhilesh Yadav on sub-quota demand

A sharp exchange between Amit Shah and Akhilesh Yadav in Parliament over sub-quota for Muslim women highlights key divisions on women’s reservation implementation.

Published

13 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

A heated exchange broke out in Parliament during discussions on the women’s reservation framework, with Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav locking horns over the demand for a sub-quota for Muslim women.

The debate unfolded as the government pushed forward key legislative measures to implement 33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

Akhilesh Yadav argued that the proposed reservation must ensure representation for women from marginalised communities, including Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Muslim women. He said that without such provisions, large sections could remain excluded from political participation.

He also questioned the timing of the bill, alleging that the Centre was avoiding a caste census. According to him, a census would lead to renewed demands for caste-based reservations, which the government is reluctant to address.

Government rejects religion-based quota

Responding to the demand, Amit Shah made it clear that reservation based on religion is not permitted under the Constitution.

He stated that any proposal to provide quota to Muslims on religious grounds would be unconstitutional, firmly rejecting the idea of a separate sub-quota for Muslim women within the broader reservation framework.

The government has maintained that the existing framework already includes provisions for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) women within the overall reservation structure.

Wider political divide over implementation

The issue of sub-categorisation within the women’s quota has emerged as a major flashpoint, even as most opposition parties broadly support the idea of women’s reservation.

Samajwadi Party leaders reiterated that their support for the bill depends on inclusion of OBC and minority women, while the government continues to defend its constitutional position.

The debate is part of a broader discussion during the special Parliament session, where multiple bills linked to delimitation and implementation of the women’s quota are being taken up.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com