Jethmalani quits as Kejriwal's counsel, seeks Rs 2 crore fee

TNN
July 26, 2017

New Delhi, Jul 26: Ram Jethmalani has quit as chief minister Arvind Kejriwal's counsel in the civil and criminal defamation cases filed by Union finance minister Arun Jaitley against the CM.jethmalani

Following Kejriwal's denial of having instructed the lawyer to use derogatory language against Jaitley during court proceedings on May 17, the lawyer has written a letter to the CM, accusing him of using even more offensive language against Jaitley during private discussions on the case.

Jethmalani has asked Kejriwal to settle his legal fees amounting to more than Rs 2 cro5re. The lawyer used an offensive word, amounting to accusing Jaitley of being a criminal, during proceedings of the Rs 10-crore defamation case against Kejriwal and five other AAP leaders.

Jaitley asked Jethmalani if the word was spoken on his client's instruction. The lawyer replied in the affirmative and Jaitley filed another Rs 10-crore defamation suit against the CM.

Stung by the fresh defamation suit, Kejriwal filed an affidavit in Delhi high court and wrote a letter to Jethmalani saying he had not given any instructions for use of the derogatory word.

In his affidavit, Kejriwal said it was " inconceivable that he would even think of instructing the senior counsel to use such objectionable words". "Neither the defendant (Kejriwal) nor the counsel (Anupam Srivastava) briefing the senior counsel (Jethmalani) gave instructions to the senior counsel to use the objectionable words on May 17, 2017," Kejriwal said in the affidavit.

In response, after conveying his decision to quit as the CM's advocate, Jethmalani also told the CM to settle his legal fee, which, by a conservative estimate, would be over Rs 2 crore. The Delhi government had, this February, cleared a payment of Rs 3.5 crore to Jethmalani, which included Rs 1 crore as retainer and Rs 22 lakh as fee for each appearance in court.

However, the chief minister's office refused to comment on the matter, saying they "have no intimation on Jethmalani withdrawing from the case so far".

Jethmalani said, "Kejriwal has written a letter to me. I have replied to that. I am not going to divulge the details of either of the letters. You ask Kejriwal to make public both the letters. I have promised him not to make it public."

Sources said, in his letter, Jethmalani reminded Kejriwal about many conferences they had at the lawyer's residence and during which he had informed the CM about how PM Narendra Modi, impressed by his relentless fight against black money, had asked him to join BJP in 2010.

The letter also said the CM had shared the lawyer's anguish about BJP doing nothing to keep its election-eve promise to get back black money and deposit Rs 15 lakh in every Indian's bank account and how Jethmalani held Modi and Jaitley responsible for this.

During such conversations, Jethmalani alleged in his letter, Kejriwal had used even more objectionable words against Jaitley. The alleged use of derogatory words by Kejriwal during the conference appeared to have made Jethmalani repeat them during the May 17 proceedings before the HC registrar in the first defamation suit.

Jaitley had filed an application for expediting the recording of evidence in an orderly and fair manner in the first Rs 10-crore defamation suit against Kejriwal and the five AAP leaders for making allegations of corruption against him by them.

Comments

Rajarama Shetty
 - 
Thursday, 27 Jul 2017

Mr. Ramanath Rai is able & experienced .six time MLA..!! MOST SENIOR .dedicated CONGRESS MAN for more than 40 years?

Are there better candidates than him?

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 29,2020

New Delhi, Mar 29: The battle against coronavirus is a tough one and it required harsh decisions to keep India safe, said Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his first Mann Ki Baat after the 21-day lockdown was imposed in the wake of COVID-19 outbreak.
"The battle against COVID-19 is a tough one and it did require such harsh decisions. It is important to keep the people of India safe. A disease must be dealt with at the very beginning as delay makes it incurable," said Prime Minister Modi.
He said that as the coronavirus has put the entire world in lockdown, so "India is doing the same."
"It is a challenge before everyone, science and knowledge, poor and rich, powerful and weak. It is neither restricted to a nation nor region or particular weather. This virus is bent upon killing human beings, eliminating them. Hence all of us, the entire humanity, must unite and resolve to eliminate it," he added.
Addressing the 63rd edition of his monthly radio programme 'Mann Ki Baat', the Prime Minister had sought forgiveness from all countrymen, and especially the poor, for the nationwide lockdown in the country in the view of the novel coronavirus.
During his address to the nation on March 24, the Prime Minister had announced a 21-day nationwide lockdown to contain the spread of the deadly virus. 

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 26,2020

Jun 26: The Supreme Court on Friday permitted the Centre and the CBSE to cancel the remaining board examinations due to the COVID-19 pandemic and gave the go-ahead for the scheme to award marks to students for the cancelled papers scheduled to be held in July.

A bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna permitted the CBSE to issue a notification for the cancellation of the examinations.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and the CBSE, said that the assessment scheme would consider marks scored by students in the last three papers of the board exams.

Both CBSE and ICSE told the top court that the results of the class X and XII board exams can be declared by the middle of July.

The top court was hearing pleas seeking relief, including scrapping of remaining exams of Class 12 scheduled from July 1 to 15, in view of increasing number of COVID-19 cases. Similar relief was sought by the ICSE Board also.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 14,2020

New Delhi, Jan 14: The curative petitions of Vinay Sharma and Mukesh, who were sentenced to death in the Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case, was on Tuesday rejected by a five-judge Supreme Court Bench led by Justice N.V. Ramana.

In a three-page order, the Bench concluded, after an in chamber consideration that began about 1.45 p.m., that there was no merit in their pleas to spare them from the gallows.

“We have gone through the curative petitions and relevant documents. In our opinion, no case is made out within the parameters indicated in the decision of this Court in Rupa Ashok Hurra versus Ashok Hurra. Hence, the curative petitions are dismissed,” the court held.

Curative is a rare remedy devised by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in its judgment in the Rupa Ashok Hurra case in 2002. A party can take only two limited grounds in a curative petition - one, he was not heard by the court before the adverse judgment was passed, and two, the judge was biased. A curative plea, which follows the dismissal of review petition, is the last legal avenue open for convicts in the Supreme Court. Sharma was the first among the four convicts to file a curative.

The Bench also rejected their pleas to stay the execution of their death sentence and for oral hearing in open court.

Besides Justice Ramana, the Bench comprised Arun Mishra, Rohinton Nariman, R. Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan.

Curative petitions were filed in the Supreme Court by both convicts on January 9. The petitions had come just days after a Delhi sessions court schedulled the execution of all the four convicts in Tihar jail on January 22.

Sharma and Mukesh, in separate curative petitions, argued that there was a “sea change” in the death penalty jurisprudence since their convictions. Carrying out the death sentence on such changed circumstances would be a “gross miscarriage of justice”.

In his plea, Sharma said the Court had commuted the death penalty in several rape and murder cases since 2017, when it first confirmed the death penalty to the Nirbhaya convicts.

“fter the pronouncement of judgment in 2017, there have been as many as 17 cases involving rape and murder in which various three-judge Benches of the Supreme Court have commuted the sentence of death,” the petition contended.

The Supreme Court recently dismissed a review petition filed by Akshay Singh, another of the four four condemned men, to review its May 5, 2017 judgment confirming the death penalty. It also refused his plea to grant him three weeks' time to file a mercy petition before the President of India.

A Bench led by Justice R. Banumathi had said it was open for the Nirbhaya case convicts to avail whatever time the law prescribes for the purpose of filing a mercy plea.

Akshay (33), Mukesh (30), Pawan Gupta (23) and Sharma (24) had brutally gang-raped a 23-year-old paramedical student in a moving bus on the intervening night of December 16-17, 2012. She died of her injuries a few days later.

The case shocked the nation and led to the tightening of anti-rape laws. Rape, especially gang rape, is now a capital crime.

One of the accused in the case, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in the Tihar jail. A juvenile, who was among the accused, was convicted by a juvenile justice board. He was released from a reformation home after serving a three-year term.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.