SC allows Pul's wife to withdraw letter

The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed Dangwimsai Pul, the first wife of former Arunachal Pradesh chief minister Kalikho Pul, to withdraw her plea for a CBI probe into allegations of corruption made against apex court judges by her husband in his 60-page note, left before his suicide on August 9, 2016.

Chief Justice of India J S Khehar has converted her letter, received by the SC registry on February 17, into a writ petition (criminal).

As the matter came up for hearing before a bench of Justices Adarsh Kumar Goel and U U Lalit, Dangwimsai’s counsel senior advocate Dushyant Dave said that she did not want a judicial order on her plea and that she would withdraw in case the judges wanted to adjudicate her contentions based on Pul’s note.

He said she wanted an extraordinary independent probe and may approach Vice President Hamid Ansari. The Supreme Court deciding it on merit would bar her other legal remedies, he said.

“This petition is listed under the orders of the CJI. In view of the fact that allegations are against a number of political persons and even the President, the matter was considered to be of public interest. However, the court could not go into the issue since the petitioner sought to withdraw it. Hence, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn,” the bench said.

During the brief hearing, Dave made repeated requests for letting her withdraw the plea. In her letter, Dangwimsai sought granting of permission for registration of an FIR on the basis of allegation of corruption made in the suicide note.

Prior permission was required for registration of FIR against judges as per the Constitution bench’s decision in the K Veeraswami Vs Union of India. He submitted that she had written a letter to the CJI only for a decision on the administrative side. He also questioned how the SC registry listed the letter for consideration on judicial side.

“It is too sensitive a matter and this bench should not hear it or it would send a very wrong message,” Dave said, pointing out that in Justice C S Karnan’s case, the SC set up a seven-judge bench to issue contempt notice against him and the charges here were far more serious.

At one point of time, the counsel tried to rake up a dismissal order by another bench in Sahara-Birla diary case. However, the bench told him to confine himself to the present case.