SC pulls up CBI over delay in appealing Babri verdict
- Highest earners in 75% rural households earned below Rs 5K: SECC
- Ex-RAW chief's revelation: Congress seeks PM's apology for Gujarat riots
- Hema Malini's car accident: Victim's family upset with BJP MP
- Kandahar operation: BJP dismisses ex-RAW chief's claims of 'goof-up'
- Gujarat HC dismisses petition against PM Narendra Modi for filing defective affidavit
The CBI was caught on the wrong foot on Thursday when the Supreme Court asked it to first establish the maintainability of its criminal appeal in the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition case since the agency was late in moving court despite claiming it to be a matter of "national importance".
Even before the CBI could argue on the merits of its appeal against an earlier ruling that said senior BJP leaders such as L K Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi cannot be tried for criminal conspiracy in the demolition, the SC said that the agency will have to first explain its over four-month delay in filing the appeal and satisfy the court why it should condone the lapses. "You just said that it is a matter of national importance. So, now could you be saying that translation of certain court documents will take days and settling the issues will take another three months? Except for your general statements, how do you intend to justify your delay? Since the other side has serious objections to condoning the delay, you require to satisfy us first," said a Bench led by Justice
H L Dattu.
Earlier, advocate P P Rao, appearing for the CBI, had begun by saying that Advani and others had committed a "national crime" and the issue involved in these appeals were of "national importance". Shooting down the argument, the SC said: "Please don't say that matter is of national importance or it is a national crime. You cannot say whether it is a national crime or not unless the court decides it in one way or the other."
When asked to explain the delay, Rao said translation of vernacular documents and other administrative work took time. The SC examined all the documents on record and questioned if the work required so much time. At this, Rao requested he be allowed to file an additional affidavit to explain the delay.