New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed concern over the manner in which advocate Prashant Bhushan has acted with a “lack of objectivity” and his assertions have bordered on an attempt to “misrepresent the facts and mislead the court”.
The observation of a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud came while dismissing PIL seeking a SIT probe into the death of Judge B.H. Loya in 2014 at Nagpur. Loya was heading the trial court that was holding a trial in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh shootout.
The bench took note of the expert opinion from Upendra Kaul, a former Professor of Cardiology at AIIMS, submitted by Bhushan, who had sought the doctor’s professional opinion on certain queries relating to the medical evidence available on record.
The bench said that in their practice before this court, counsel are “expected to assist the court with a sense of objectivity in aid of justice”.
“But what has happened here is that Bhushan has adopted a dual mantle, assuming the character of a counsel for the intervenor as well as an individual personally interested on behalf of the intervening organisation (NGO CPIL) of which he is a member.
“He has gone to the length of personally collecting evidence to somehow bolster the case. The manner in which the opinion of Dr Kaul was obtained on the basis of a laconic questionnaire leaves much to be desired and is a singular reflection on the lack of objectivity which is to be expected from counsel appearing before this court. This has bordered on an attempt to misrepresent the facts and mislead the court,” the bench added on its judgement.
