My letter is a response to Jayashree’s column pertaining to  CJI DY Chandrachud. Her attributing of adjournments in Umar Khalid’s case to CJI is disingenuous. Khalid’s plea has not even been listed once before the CJI’s bench. His plea has been listed before these 

benches:

Justices AS Bopanna, Hima Kohli

Justices AS Bopanna, PK Mishra

Justices Bose, Bela Trivedi

Justices Bela Trivedi, Dipankar Dutta

Justices Bela Trivedi, SC Sharma

Jayashree forgot to mention that out of the eight adjournments, three adjournments have been granted on the request of Khalid’s lawyers. When liberals get outraged at adjournments in Khalid’s case, they must ask why lawyers seek adjournments. In May 2023, when notice was issued by the SC in his bail matter, his lawyers were asked by the bench whether they wanted his plea to be listed during summer vacations in June 2023. But they asked the court to list the matter after reopening of courts in July 2023. 

His lawyers are partially responsible for the pendency of his bail application. In the last 3- 4 years, the SC has been consistent in granting bail to “political prisoners”. 

Following are the examples:

Prashant Kanojia

Erendro Leichombam (NSA)

Patricia Mukhim (FIR was quashed)

Vinod Dua (sedition case against him was also quashed)

Sudha Bhardwaj (bail was confirmed in UAPA case)

Mohd Zubair

Varavara Rao (UAPA)

Teesta Setalvad (interim and regular bail )

Siddique Kappan (UAPA)

Anand Teltumbde (bail was confirmed in UAPA case)

Pawan Khera

Arun Ferreira, Vernon Gonsalves (UAPA)

Unfortunately denial of bail to Manish Sisodia was an exception.

Jayashree wrote in her column that in 2023, the SC delivered only one judgement against Union government in a “substantive matter” (Government of NCT v UOI). 

There were at least two other such cases:

Quashing  of ban imposed on Media One news channel. (MBL v UOI)

Appointment of CEC and ECs (Anoop Baranwal v UOI)

CJI DY Chandrachud cannot be labelled a “status quoist” (as Jayashree said) in terms of listing of constitution bench cases.  During his predecessor CJI NV Ramana’s tenure, not a single Constitution bench case was listed. On the other hand, during CJI Chandrachud’s tenure, in more than 15 CB cases judgments have been pronounced, marriage equality, Article 370 are few examples.  After six years, the electoral bonds case was also heard by a CB and judgement was reserved.

Koshik

***

Hello NL,

I have an obvious recommendation to NL team and Hafta listeners:

The 84-page document submitted by South Africa to the International Court of Justice.

I would like to know what NL’s in-house lawyer Anand thinks of this. Does he still think the so-called state of Israel can do anything it wants because it’s a “state” and Palestinians deserve to just perish without the right to self-defence or resistance as they are stateless?

Regards

Mahendra

***

Hi, this letter is about NL Reads of ‘Gadgets guru to gun slinging gangster’ article. I couldn’t find the link to writing a letter for NL Reads, so I am writing here. Hope you don’t mind. It was a good report about the person who committed the crime and how it affects everyone, including his own family. I would like to thank the reporter who wrote that piece. Thanks and keep doing the good work.

Farqul

***

Hi, I have a yearly subscription and want to add the NL + TNM subscription. Is there a way to move to this subscription by paying the balance amount? I am sure there are many others in the same situation.

Sarath Kumar Kandalam 

***

Hi, I used to subscribe to Mint earlier (mainly for Mint Lounge), but owing to my general disgust with HT, I unsubscribed long ago. Now, such is my programming that rather than paying HT Rs 3,000 for an annual subscription for Mint, I would rather extend my NL subscription. Question: Where do all the panellists of Hafta get their cultural fix from? Too much news takes a toll on everyone, I am sure, and I am no different. Any plans to start a culture desk here at NL. Much love to everyone at Hafta and NL. Mwaah, mwah, mwah!

Kumar anonymous