Judicial favouritism by Supreme Court in cases against ex Karnataka CM B S Yediyurappa, lawyer alleges in letter to CJI

New Delhi: A lawyer has shot off a letter to the Chief Justice of India with a plea that the Supreme Court should consider taking suo motu notice of a pattern related to prolonged stay in corruption cases and direct expeditious hearing of all such pending cases in the Supreme Court involving former Karnataka CM B S Yediyurappa and other MPs/MLAs.

Advocate Sachin S Deshpande from Bengaluru said the court should consider reviewing the justification for continuing the stays granted in various cases, particularly where they have operated for several years without substantial hearing.

The lawyer who claimed to have tracked the corruption cases against Yediyurappa claimed that the cases against him appear to show a pattern of judicial favouritism at the Supreme Court and therefore, deserve to be brought to the CJI's attention.

"There is a disturbing asymmetry in how stays are handled. When Yediyurappa seeks stays, they are granted promptly by the Supreme Court, without reason and continue indefinitely. However, when investigating agencies or complainants seek stays against High Court orders favourable to Yediyurappa, such stays are not granted and the matters remain unlisted for years," he claimed.

The ACB's SLPs regarding the Shivarama Karanth Layout denotification case and the CAG Report case have remained pending without any interim relief, effectively allowing Yediyurappa to benefit from favourable High Court orders for extended periods, he highlighted.

"This creates an appearance of differential treatment that could erode public confidence in the judicial system," he said.

His letter further claimed in multiple cases - the Alam Pasha case, the TJ Abraham case, and the Vasudeva Reddy case - stays were granted promptly upon the filing of SLPs by Yediyurappa. These stays have continued for years without any substantial hearing, the lawyer said.

"These patterns require urgent attention not just for these specific cases but for maintaining the integrity of the anti-corruption legal framework. The Supreme Court's role as the guardian of the rule of law necessitates addressing these concerns to ensure that the justice system's handling of corruption cases remains above any perception of favouritism or unusual protection," he said.

The lawyer stated the Supreme Court's directives and policies appear to be undermined by these cases. In 2017, this court established Special Courts for trying cases against MPs/MLAs, emphasizing speedy disposal of corruption cases.

"However, the pattern in Yediyurappa's cases shows precisely the opposite - prolonged stays and indefinite pendency, effectively defeating the court's objective of expeditious handling of political corruption cases," he alleged.