"Justice cannot be purchased like this", a "furious" Supreme Court said on Wednesday while coming down heavily on VVIP chopper scam accused Gautam Khaitan in a case related to the black money law.
The apex court, dealing with the issue as to whether the 2016 black money law could be allowed to operate with retrospective effect from July 2015 to book and probe offenders, took umbrage at Khaitan for seeking four weeks time to make his stand clear.
He was seeking time to respond to the Centre's appeal against the Delhi High Court order which had said that the 2016 black money law cannot be allowed to operate with retrospective effect from July 2015.
The top court had in May this year stayed the high court's May 16 order and had said it would hear the matter.
The approach by Khaitan's counsel was not appreciated by the top court which said it was a delaying tactic and to avoid the bench which was hearing the matter.
"What is your effort, we understand that. We are averse to it. Do not speak. We are furious. This is not the way. You want to avoid the bench. Justice cannot be delayed like this," a bench of justices Arun Mishra and M R Shah told the lawyer appearing for Khaitan.
"Do not do this non-sense. Justice cannot be purchased like this," the bench said.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, told the bench that an important "question of law" is involved in the case.
After the bench said it would hear the matter on September 17, Khaitan's counsel said, "We want to file our reply (to Centre's plea). Give us four weeks time to file reply".
The contention by Khaitan's counsel irked the bench which said, "No. Not this way. We deprecate this kind of work. This is not the way to behave in the court. What is happening in this court? Not this way. It should not have happened in the open court. You are doing something very objectionable."
The bench further said, "You are lawyers and you should protect the law. The way you have conducted yourself is not proper."
However, Khaitan's counsel apologised to the bench and said, "I was only requesting that give me whatever time the court feel to file a reply."
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
