Justice K.K.Tated recused from the case.

 

 Justice Tated recused from the case. He recused from the hearing of an Application for recall of his wrong order dated 14.10.2020 which was passed in willful disregard of the Supreme Court judgment.

No reason is mentioned as to why he is  recusing from the case.

The allegations made by the victim and members of the Indian Bar Association against Justice Tated are that,  Justice Tated in two high profile cases has passed an order granting unwarranted relief to  the accused persons. First illegal order is stayed by the Supreme court. But Justice Tated again passed a similar order to help another accused. He misused his power in a Criminal Writ when said assignment is not with  him and despite having knowledge of the fact that his similar wrong order is stayed by the Full Bench of the Supreme Court.  In fact Justice Tated committed gross illegality by protecting the said accused who has been  directed to surrender by the Supreme Court and whose application for extention of time was rejected by the Supreme Court. The said case is also a high profile case where the accused is involved in committing  an extortion of Rs. 50 Crores by creating forged documents regarding the property worth around Rupees 10,000 Crores  and  giving threats for filing false cases and claims  if  the said amount is not paid .

Supreme Court in R.R. Parekh’s case (2016) 14 SCC 1  ruled that, when any Judge passes an order in wanton breach of the mandatory procedure then such order itself is a proof that, the said Judge acted with an ulterior motive. No further proofs of corruption are required to remove the Judge from his post.

There are many other similar offences committed by Justice K. K. Tated and various complaints are already filed against him alleging his incapacity, lack of basic legal knowledge, inability to appreciate the legal position, fraud on power, legal malice and serious offences against administration of Justice. It is grievance of many lawyers specially from the complaints received by the Indian Bar Association, that Justice K. K. Tated is not able to handle the responsible public post of a High Court Judge. He only tries to gain time by passing orders like “remove office objection ”, “file reply affidavit or rejoinder” and avoid to enter in to merits of legal position. Whenever any crucial orders are passed by him then at most of the time he commits blunder and the order is contempt of the Supreme Court. The list of such incidences and concerned orders are mentioned in the complaint sent to the Hon’ble President of India and Chief Justice of India.

 Two complaints for sanction for criminal prosecution under sec.220,211,219,218,192,193,466,471,474,167 r/w 120(B),34 etc of IPC are filed before Hon’ble President of India one year back and the complainant is going to file criminal case as he got the deemed sanction to prosecute Justice K.K.Tated and Justice N. J. Jamadar and others.

As per law laid down by the Supreme Court and further explained in  Shashikant Prasad Vs.  C.B.I. 2013 SCC OnLine ALL 13099, it is clear that if the prayer for sanction is not refused within 3 months then the sanction is deemed to be accorded and court is bound to take cognizance against the said Judge. 

 In Raman Lal Vs. State 2001 Cri. L. J. 800 the Magistrate passed an order under sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. directing Police to register FIR against High Court Judge and others without any permission or sanction  from CJI.  Said order passed by the Magistrate was upheld by the Supreme courtand the said High court Judge was charge sheeted and demoted to lower court.

Earlier for similar reason of  passing an order granting relief to undeserving accused despite contrary order by the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice  had withdrawn all the judicial work from Justice Shri Narayan  Shukla of Allahabad High Court and CBI has  arrested his middleman Justice Quddusi. The case was  for passing an order granting relief to undeserving accused despite contrary order by the Supreme Court.  Said order was passed by Justice Shukla in going out of its way to give relief to the accused by taking bribe in a matter of  Crores of rupees.

       As per the news published in Hindustan Times on  Jan 10, 2020, the retired Odisha High Court judge IM Quddusi, who was arrested in September 2017 in a judicial corruption scandal, and his associates used code words such as ped (plant), gamla (pot), samaan (goods) and prasad (offering) while referring to bribes allegedly to be paid to a certain “captain” to get favourable order from the Supreme Court, according to a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) charge sheet in the case.

A Delhi court took cognisance of the charge sheet in November last year. In December, CBI also filed a fresh case in connection with the scandal, naming sitting Allahabad high court judge Shri Narayan Shukla for allegedly accepting a bribe to deliver an order in favour of Prasad Medical College.

In its charge sheet, exclusively accessed by HT, CBI has attached 80 telephone intercepts of Quddusi and other accused which, the agency says, reveals the whole conspiracy. It says Giri, BP Yadav and Agarwala met Quddusi at the latter’s residence on August 23, 2017. Two days later, the Allahabad HC division bench comprising Shri Narayan Shukla passed an interim order directing that the college shall not be delisted till next hearing.

Quddusi discussed the bribe amount with Agarwala and it was fixed at ~3 crore after negotiations, according to the charge sheet, with ~2.5 crore going to the “captain”.At one point, Agarwala tells Quddusi: “….abhi jo hamara captain hai na, unka all over India hai, job hi kaam ho karne k elite tayyar hai (Our captain right now has influence all over India and he can get anything done).”

The charge sheet says: “Quddusi and Agarwala were referring to amounts of money as different items such as ‘gamla’, ‘ped’, etc.”

According to the charge sheet, Quddusi was acting for the Yadavs and it was Agarwala who was trying to get a favourable order from the Supreme Court.

In one conversation, Agarwala informs BP Yadav that the government of the “chaiwala” (referring to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has made no secret of his humble beginnings) is keeping an eye on everyone and the captain will therefore not meet anyone. “The the work will be done not just 100% but 500% but problem is that first money has to be paid,” Agarwala tells Yadav. He further adds that his man can get any work done for the following 14-15 months.

 Mumbai: 19.10.2020: Today Justice K. K. Tated recused from the case seeking recall of the order passed by the Bench headed by him. The prayer in the said application reads thus;

" The applicant therefore most humbly prays:

(a)

                   that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to hold that the order dated 14.10.2020 this Hon’ble Court (Coram: Shri. Justice K.K. Tated and Shri. Justice N.R. Borkar JJ.) in captioned petition, being Writ Petition No. 2413 of 2019 is null and void as said assignment was not with this Hon’ble Bench and there was no  order of not hearing this case  by the Hon’ble Bench having assignment because till the mentioning of the matter the Respondent No. 2 was represented by the counsel Rahul Kadam and Adv. Santosh Musale and therefore the listing and hearing of the matter directly before the Bench is illegal and the order passed is without jurisdiction in view of law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Prakash Chand, (1998) 1 SCC 1, Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms vs. Union of India (2018) 1 SCC 196.

(b)                  To hold that the interim orders dated 14.10.2020 passed by this Hon’ble Court (Coram: Shri. Justice K.K. Tated and Shri. Justice N.R. Borkar JJ.) in captioned petition, being Writ Petition No. 2413 of 2019, is per incuriam in view of order dated 12.10.2020 passed by the Full Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court thereby staying the similar order dated  28.09.2020  passed by this Hon’ble Court (Coram: Shri. Justice K.K. Tated and Shri. Justice N.R. Borkar JJ.)in the case of  P. Suresh Kumar vs. State of Maharashtra in Criminal Writ Petition (st) No. 2306 of 2020 (Exh.   ) which is stayed by the three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 12.10.2020 in M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Mahashtra in SLP (Crl.) No. 4819 of 2020. [Exh. ….]

(c)                   that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased recall its order dated 14.10.2020 passed by this Hon’ble Court(Coram:Shri. Justice K.K. Tated and Shri. Justice N.R. Borkar JJ.)in captioned petition, being Writ Petition No. 2413 of 2019, in view of law laid down by full bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matters of (i) New India Assurance Ltd. Vs. Krishna Kumar Pandey 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1786, (ii)M. S. Ahlawat Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. - (2000) 1 SCC 278, (iii) …… and so also by this Hon’ble Court in the matter of (vi) Ravindra Narayan Joglekar Vs. Encon Exports Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. – 2008 ALL MR (Cri.) 2032 (vii)Trident Steel Engineering Co. Vs Vallourec – 2018 SCC online Bom 4060  and may be further pleased to direct the registry to place the matter before the appropriate bench, as per the assignment/roster of this Hon’ble Court and accord an opportunity to the applicant to hear the petition afresh;

(d)                  pending the hearing and final disposal of the present application, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the Registrar ( Judicial) of this Hon’ble Court to  conduct an enquiry with regard to mis-deeds done in the matter, by the petitioner and advocate representing him by getting the matter listed before Bench against the roster and may be further pleased to direct to submit their report to that effect, within such reasonable period, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper;

 

 CASE OF JUSTICE SHRI NARAYAN SHUKLA OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT:

Justice Shukla had allegedly permitted a medical college to accept students despite the Medical Council and the apex court’s disapproval.

In the GCRG Medical College versus Union of India case, a Supreme Court bench comprising CJI Misra and Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud had taken serious note of the action of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court headed by Justice Shukla, in going out of its way to give relief to the management of the medical college that had been debarred by the Medical Council of India (MCI).

Shukla was mentioned in a preliminary investigation conducted by the CBI last September. The investigation agency had sought CJI's permission to file an FIR against Justice Shukla. The evidence provided by the CBI to the CJI included transcripts of alleged telephone conversations between retired Odisha High Court judge I M Quddusi, middleman Vishwanath Agarwala and B P Yadav of the Prasad Education Trust.

The CBI had registered an FIR against Quddusi and five others in an alleged corruption case and carried out searches at eight places on September 20.

Justice (retired) Ishrat Masroor Quddusi was booked on corruption charges, along with B P Yadav and Palash Yadav of the Prasad Educational Trust which runs a medical college in Lucknow, Biswanath Agrawala a middleman and two others -- Bhawana Pandey and Sudhir Giri, CBI spokesperson had inormed.

Justice (retired) Quddusi was a judge in the Orissa High Court between 2004 and 2010.

 

Justice Shukla had also made unilateral changes to an order passed by the bench headed by him, in his own handwriting, without even bothering to consult the other judge on the bench.

Former Orissa High Court Judge I. M. Quddusi was also booked by the CBI for an alleged fixing case for getting the favorable order by paying Crores of Rupees. Justice Quddusi was arrested days after the agency filed an FIR against him and four others.

 The committee said that Justice Shukla had lowered the credibility of the office. It said that he “had disgraced the values of judicial life, acted in a manner unbecoming of a judge” and lowered the “majesty, dignity and credibility of his office”. The committee’s report states that “there is sufficient substance in the allegations” against Justice Shukla, enough for him to be removed.

The three-member committee, which looked into the corruption allegations levelled on Justice Shukla comprised Madras High Court Chief Justice Indira Banerjee, Sikkim High Court Chief Justice S. K. Agnihotri and Madhya Pradesh High Court Judfe P. K. Jaiswal. 

 

After receiving the in-house committee’s report, CJI Misra wrote to Justice Shukla on 21 January 2018, informing him about his decision to accept the committee’s report and write to the President for initiation of the process to impeach him.

Misra also advised Shukla to “resign from your office or seek voluntary retirement”, adding that in case he chose to do neither, he would ask the Allahabad High Court chief justice to withdraw judicial work from him.

Shukla replied within hours of the CJI writing to him, expressing his “unwillingness to resign or seek voluntary retirement”.

The next day, 22 January, CJI Misra wrote to the Allahabad High Court chief justice, informing him about the developments, and advising him against allotting any judicial work to Justice Shukla. The high court CJ wrote back to the CJI the same day, informing him that work had been withdrawn from Shukla.

According to sources in the Supreme Court, Shukla wrote to then-CJI Ranjan Gogoi in May last year, asking to be allowed to discharge judicial duties, since he was “sitting idle without work since more than one year”. But his request was not accepted.

Justice Shukla retired on 17 July, earning the dubious distinction of not being assigned any judicial work for nearly two and a half years, the longest such period.

The committee’s report, dated 20 January 2018, concluded that “the aberrations complained of are senior enough to call for initiation of proceedings for his removal (as a judge)”.

Among other things, the judge was accused of showing “needless interest” in two important pending matters — GCRG Medical College versus Union of India, and one filed by Dr Nishith Rai, vice-chancellor of Dr Shakuntala Misra Rehabilitation University (for the differently-abled), who had been removed from his post over “serious charges of corruption and for making illegal appointments”.

While Justice Shukla denied any wrongdoing, the in-house committee found merit in the complaints and recommended action against him.

Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra cleared the way for Justice Shukla’s persecution following a panel inquiry against him, which found Justice Shukla guilty of impropriety.

The Chief Justice of India has accepted the recommendations of the three-member panel constituted by him in November last year to look into the alleged allegations against Justice Shukla. The committee was set up after the Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh had complained to the CJI in September last year.

The inquiry committee has found Justice Shukla guilty of impropriety and has asked for his removal from office. The committee said that Justice Shukla had lowered the credibility of the office. It said that he “had disgraced the values of judicial life, acted in a manner unbecoming of a judge” and lowered the “majesty, dignity and credibility of his office”. The committee’s report states that “there is sufficient substance in the allegations” against Justice Shukla, enough for him to be removed.

Acting on the panel’s recommendations, CJI Misra gave him two options, either to take voluntary retirement or to resign. Justice Shukla, who refuted all the charges, did not accept the suggestions of the CJI.  After which the only option left was to withdraw all the judicial work from him and the CJI ordered for the same. His name reportedly did not appear in the January 30 roster released by the Allahabad high court registry.

The case of 32 colleges is included in the in-house inquiry report. The colleges are were barred by the Union government from admitting students for medical courses for two academic years starting from 2017.