<p dir="auto">The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its order on Andhra Pradesh High Court's directions to conduct an enquiry into a secretly recorded conversation of former judge V Eswaraiah with a suspended district munsif magistrate, about a sitting top court's judge and then chief justice.</p>.<p dir="auto">A bench presided over by Justice Ashok Bhushan said it will consider the contention by the former judge that the High Court's order has to be set aside as serious observations were made without issuing a notice or hearing him.</p>.<p dir="auto">The top court wrapped up hearing on Justice Eswaraiah's petition against the August 13, 2020 order by the High Court which directed an enquiry into a conversation into "conspiracy".</p>.<p dir="auto">Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for an intervenor, said that a table has been made of the conversations that the judge admits and that which he does not admit.</p>.<p dir="auto">Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Justice Eswaraiah, contended that when the HC was hearing a case relating to Covid issues, the district magistrate filed an intervention application in which he annexed a pen drive and later leaked the conversation to the media.</p>.<p dir="auto">"There is no criminal conspiracy in the conversation. Even if one goes through the transcript filed by the district magistrate there is nothing to show that a crime has been committed," Bhushan said.</p>.<p dir="auto">"If an inquiry is to be conducted then a complete enquiry must be conducted into the transactions also," he added.</p>.<p dir="auto">The counsel objected to the contention by Sibal that the transcript may have been edited.</p>.<p dir="auto">Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for an intervenor, said that the affidavit filed by Justice Eswaraiah stated that certain parts of the transcript may not be correct or edited. This itself made his case worse because there has to be a complete transcript.</p>.<p dir="auto">In a special leave petition, the 69-year-old retired judge and chairman of Andhra Pradesh State Higher Education Regulatory and Monitoring Commission contended that the HC "erred" in ordering the enquiry on the basis of an unverified pen-drive to conclude a plot was hatched against judges.</p>.<p dir="auto">He claimed he had openly exposed various improper acts of the sitting judge of the Supreme Court in various press conferences in the past, which he considered against judicial propriety and misuse of power, such as his close proximity to the former Chief Minister N Chandra Babu Naidu.</p>
<p dir="auto">The Supreme Court on Monday reserved its order on Andhra Pradesh High Court's directions to conduct an enquiry into a secretly recorded conversation of former judge V Eswaraiah with a suspended district munsif magistrate, about a sitting top court's judge and then chief justice.</p>.<p dir="auto">A bench presided over by Justice Ashok Bhushan said it will consider the contention by the former judge that the High Court's order has to be set aside as serious observations were made without issuing a notice or hearing him.</p>.<p dir="auto">The top court wrapped up hearing on Justice Eswaraiah's petition against the August 13, 2020 order by the High Court which directed an enquiry into a conversation into "conspiracy".</p>.<p dir="auto">Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for an intervenor, said that a table has been made of the conversations that the judge admits and that which he does not admit.</p>.<p dir="auto">Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Justice Eswaraiah, contended that when the HC was hearing a case relating to Covid issues, the district magistrate filed an intervention application in which he annexed a pen drive and later leaked the conversation to the media.</p>.<p dir="auto">"There is no criminal conspiracy in the conversation. Even if one goes through the transcript filed by the district magistrate there is nothing to show that a crime has been committed," Bhushan said.</p>.<p dir="auto">"If an inquiry is to be conducted then a complete enquiry must be conducted into the transactions also," he added.</p>.<p dir="auto">The counsel objected to the contention by Sibal that the transcript may have been edited.</p>.<p dir="auto">Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for an intervenor, said that the affidavit filed by Justice Eswaraiah stated that certain parts of the transcript may not be correct or edited. This itself made his case worse because there has to be a complete transcript.</p>.<p dir="auto">In a special leave petition, the 69-year-old retired judge and chairman of Andhra Pradesh State Higher Education Regulatory and Monitoring Commission contended that the HC "erred" in ordering the enquiry on the basis of an unverified pen-drive to conclude a plot was hatched against judges.</p>.<p dir="auto">He claimed he had openly exposed various improper acts of the sitting judge of the Supreme Court in various press conferences in the past, which he considered against judicial propriety and misuse of power, such as his close proximity to the former Chief Minister N Chandra Babu Naidu.</p>
