The Supreme Court has ordered the vote-for-note case to be heard from the beginning, setting aside the proceedings conducted so far after a judge who had heard the matter retired. The next hearing is scheduled for September 5.
Supreme Court Orders Fresh Start in Vote-for-Note Case
A significant turn has emerged in the ‘vote-for-note’ case, which shook the Telugu states 11 years ago. The Supreme Court has set aside the proceedings conducted in the case so far and directed that the trial be taken up afresh from the beginning.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Justice Suryakant passed the clarification on Thursday while hearing petitions connected with the long-running case. The bench also included Justice Joy Mallya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohan.
The development came after lawyers representing the parties indicated that lengthy arguments would be required in the matter. However, before those arguments could proceed, the Chief Justice pointed out that a judge who had previously been part of the bench hearing the case had retired.
Against that background, the proceedings conducted before the earlier bench were set aside. The Supreme Court made it clear that the hearing would now begin again from the start.
The next hearing has been scheduled for September 5.
Challenge to the Case Under the Corruption Act
The Supreme Court is considering two petitions together in connection with the case.
One of them was filed by Revanth Reddy through a special leave petition (criminal) on July 22, 2021. In his petition, he challenged the validity of the case on the ground that it had been registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act rather than under the Election Laws Code.
Revanth Reddy argued that the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act applicable at the time the case was registered did not cover the alleged conduct in the circumstances of the vote-for-note case.
His petition referred specifically to Sections 7 and 11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. According to the argument presented in the petition, accepting a bribe constituted an offence under those provisions, while conspiracy to give a bribe was not covered by them.
The petition also referred to an amendment made to Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act in 2018. That amendment made acts such as giving a bribe and abetting or inciting such conduct offences.
However, Revanth Reddy contended that the vote-for-note case was registered in 2015 and therefore had to be considered under the law that existed at that time.
Argument Over Legislative Council Elections
Another major point raised in the petition concerned the scope of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Revanth Reddy argued that Sections 7, 11 and 12 of the Act applied only to individuals performing official duties, including those holding government jobs. He contended that voting or choosing not to vote in Legislative Council elections did not fall within the scope of those provisions.
On that basis, he argued that the case had been registered in violation of the applicable legal provisions and should therefore be considered invalid.
The petition has remained before the Supreme Court as part of the broader legal proceedings surrounding the case.
Sandra Venkata Veeraiah's Petition
The second petition before the Supreme Court was filed by Sandra Venkata Veeraiah.
Veeraiah approached the Supreme Court on April 13, 2021, seeking to have his name removed from the vote-for-note case. His petition is being heard together with Revanth Reddy’s challenge.
The two petitions have consequently brought the legal questions surrounding the case before the Supreme Court in the same proceedings.
Thursday's Hearing
The petitions came up for hearing before the three-judge bench headed by CJI Justice Suryakant on Thursday.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra appeared for the petitioners, while senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu represented the Telangana government.
At the beginning of the hearing, lawyers appearing for both sides indicated that detailed and lengthy arguments would be necessary. They therefore sought an adjournment of the matter.
The Chief Justice, however, addressed a procedural issue concerning the earlier hearing of the case.
He noted that a judge who had been part of the bench that previously heard the matter had since retired. As a result, the hearing conducted before that bench was set aside.
The Supreme Court consequently directed that the case be heard afresh.
Proceedings to Begin From the Beginning
The order marks a fresh stage in the legal proceedings surrounding the vote-for-note case, which dates back to 2015.
Rather than continuing from the point reached during the earlier proceedings, the case will now return to the beginning of the hearing process before the present bench.
The Supreme Court's direction means that the arguments already heard will not form the basis for continuing the proceedings before the new bench. The parties will therefore have the opportunity to present their arguments afresh.
With the next hearing fixed for September 5, the petitions challenging different aspects of the case will now return to the Supreme Court for further consideration.
The latest development has therefore reset the proceedings in the long-running vote-for-note case, with the Supreme Court set to hear the matter from the beginning.
0 Comments