The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Karnataka High Court judge, who had made some adverse remarks against the Karnataka Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) chief during a bail plea hearing, to defer the next hearing of the case by three days so as to enable it to go through an order passed by him on July 11. A bench presided by Chief Justice of India N V Ramana was told that the order wherein the judge had recorded the alleged indirect threats he received for going against the official was yet to be uploaded. The bench also comprising Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli was hearing separate pleas by the Karnataka government and the Additional Director General of Police (ADGP)-rank officer Seemanth Kumar Singh, challenging the order passed by the judge on July 7. Earlier last week, Justice H P Sandesh had stated that he had received an indirect threat of transfer over his intervention in the bribery case probe involving the office of Bengaluru Urban deputy commissioner. “Your ACB ADGP (Seemanth Singh) seems to be a powerful person. I was told by a fellow judge that I could be transferred for the remarks. I will record the threat of transfer in the order,” the judge had said. Subsequently on July 7, the judge said in the court that Singh is undermining the ACB. In an order dictated in an open court, Justice Sandesh said that Singh has “not shown enthusiasm to protect the institution (ACB)”. The HC was hearing a bail plea filed by one Mahesh P S, an employee at the office of Bengaluru Urban Deputy Commissioner (DC) J Manjunath. Mahesh, arrested by the ACB on charges of corruption after he was caught allegedly receiving a bribe of Rs 5 lakh, submitted in a statement that he received the money allegedly on the instruction of Manjunath, who was not named in the FIR initially and was arrested only after HC intervened. Expressing disappointment over the ACB investigation, Justice Sandesh also directed it to produce all the closure reports filed by it. Appearing for the state government in the SC, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the remarks could have been avoided. He also pointed out that despite the SC on Monday (July 11) scheduling the appeal's hearing for Tuesday, the HC had passed the order on Monday wherein it recorded the alleged threat to the judge. Pointing out that the orders had been passed during a bail hearing, Mehta said though the HC has the power to supervise a probe, the same cannot be invoked while exercising bail jurisdiction. Singh’s counsel submitted that strictures were passed against the officer without hearing him. He added that Singh’s Annual Confidential Reports were read in an open court. Though the Solicitor General sought a stay on the proceedings before the HC, the SC said it was not staying but will first look at the July 11 order.
