CMDRF case: Lokayukta mocks petitioner’s lawyer, asks him to study LLB again
Lokayukta asked the petitioner what was the relevance of the plea to reconsider the case as the Kerala High Court had already rejected a similar petition.
Lokayukta asked the petitioner what was the relevance of the plea to reconsider the case as the Kerala High Court had already rejected a similar petition.
Lokayukta asked the petitioner what was the relevance of the plea to reconsider the case as the Kerala High Court had already rejected a similar petition.
Thiruvananthapuram: Dramatic scenes were witnessed during a hearing under Kerala Lokayukta in a case related to the alleged misuse of the Chief Minister’s Distress Relief Fund (CMDRF) on Friday, with the Upa Lokayukta even ridiculing the petitioner’s advocate.
Later, the Lokayukta and the two Upa Lokayuktas rejected the interim petition filed by the plaintiff, R S Sasikumar.
During the hearing, Upa Lokayukta Babu Mathew P Joseph asked Sasikumar’s lawyer Subair Kunhu whether he had any scruples. The Upa Lokayukta said that the lawyer should not have told the bench that he would present his arguments in writing. “If you don’t know the law, go and study LLB,” said the bench.
Subair Kunhu had appeared for Sasikumar in place of senior advocate George Poonthottam.
Sasikumar had filed the interim plea urging the Lokayukta to reconsider its stand that a new three-member bench should examine the validity of the case as the first order of the Lokayukta was not applicable to it.
On Friday, the Lokayukta asked the petitioner what was the relevance of the plea to reconsider the case as the Kerala High Court had already rejected a similar petition. “If you are not aware of the law, study LLB,” said the Lokayukta.
The Lokayukta also asked the petitioner what more clarifications he needed in the order of the High Court division bench. It also asked the petitioner whether he had moved the interim petition to delay the case further.
“As the High Court has already rejected the plea to reexamine the case, did you move this petition to mock us?” asked the Lokayukta.
Director General of Prosecutions T A Shaji appeared for the state government. He said that according to the law, the validity of the case could be examined if there was a difference of opinion in the Lokayukta. “The case is proceeding as per the rules. The full bench of the Lokayukta should examine all aspects of the case. The demand raised in the interim petition cannot be allowed,” argued Shaji.