HC adjourns to May 22 hearing on ex-SC judge defamation plea

The Delhi High Court today said a defamation suit filed by former Supreme Court judge Swatanter Kumar against a woman lawyer and some media houses will not be heard till her plea for transfer of the case to Bangalore is decided by the Supreme Court.
Justice Manmohan Singh adjourned the matter to May 22 and directed the woman lawyer's counsel to place before him the petition filed in the apex court before that date.
Justice Singh also said that the court will not come under the pressure of any side in the matter.
The lawyer, who had accused Justice Kumar of sexual harassment during her stint as his law intern, has said in her transfer plea that she "has a fundamental right to a fair trial and genuinely apprehends that she will not get fair trial in the Delhi High Court" as he was an advocate and a judge in the same court for quite a long time.

The court adjourned the case after advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for the woman lawyer, moved an application for deferring the hearing in the matter as her transfer plea has been filed in the apex court.
The application, which was moved in a sealed envelope, drew strong objections from senior advocate A S Chandhiok, appearing for Justice Kumar.

Chandhiok said that while the application was moved in a sealed envelope, the contents of the transfer petition have been published extensively by the defendant media house and claimed that it was a violation of the ban imposed by the court on publication and telecast of the woman lawyer's allegation against Justice Kumar.

This resulted in a heated exchange of words between the two counsel.
Meanwhile, Additional Solicitor General Rajeeve Mehra, appearing for the Centre, said that it is not a necessary party to the proceedings.
The High Court, on January 16, had granted interim relief to Justice Kumar, who is at present the NGT chairperson, and had barred publication and telecast of the woman lawyer's allegation against him.
Justice Kumar had also demanded Rs five crore as damages from the law intern and three media groups that publicised her complaint.