The Congress on Friday said that the Supreme Court’s intervention into matters related to the shortfall in the country’s health infrastructure amid the second wave of the coronavirus pandemic amounted to centralisation of judicial powers.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognisance of the matter after noting that at least six High Courts were hearing cases related to the management of the pandemic. The court had directed that the cases pending before the High Courts be withdrawn as it would create confusion.
“The intervention was uncalled for...It was wrong, it is wrong, and it will remain wrong,” Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi said, while briefing the press on Friday.
Noting that decentralisation of powers was the need of the hour amid the pandemic, Singhvi said that the Supreme Court’s intervention was not suo motu, but a “reaction” to the proceedings of various High Courts. He said that the Supreme Court would not be able to pass orders at local level in a way High Courts can.
“Would the Supreme Court be able to provide the relief Delhi High Court did at 9 pm... No it definitely cannot,” Singhvi said. He was referring to the Delhi High Court’s order on Tuesday asking the Centre to implement a ban on use of industrial oxygen. It had criticised the central government for waiting till April 22 to implement the ban.
Singhvi also asserted that the court’s decision was principally wrong as it would have a “freezing, paralysing ill-effect” on the observations made by the High Courts.
Earlier on Friday, the Supreme Court, while hearing the suo motu case, expressed its displeasure at the criticism by senior lawyers against its decisions.
A bench of Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, L Nageswara Rao and S Ravindra Bhat said there was no intention to take over Covid-19 cases from the High Courts. The court’s comment came after the Supreme Court Bar Association had pointed out that the High Courts were better placed to get immediate reports on the Covid-19 situation and pass swift directions in the cases. It also moved the Supreme Court against its order.
Bobde was hearing the case on his last day at the chief justice’s office, and retired from his post soon after the proceedings.
High Courts pulling up state governments
Besides the Delhi High Court’s observations, the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court had on Wednesday, taken exception to the Union health ministry’s direction to cut down the oxygen supply to Maharashtra. The court also came down heavily on the Maharashtra government for its “extremely callous” behaviour in procuring and allocating antiviral drug remdesivir to treat coronavirus patients in critical condition.
On Tuesday, the Gujarat High Court had asked the Vijay Rupani-led state government why many Covid-19 patients were unable to get admitted to hospitals if there were enough beds available. Last week, the court had questioned its official data on the number of coronavirus cases being reported.
The Telangana High Court on Monday had given a 48-hour ultimatum to the state government to decide whether it will impose a lockdown to contain the rise in Covid-19 cases. A day later, the state government imposed a night curfew till April 30.
In Uttar Preadesh, the Allahabad High Court on Monday criticised the Adityanathl-led government for its handling of the sharp rise in Covid-19 cases and imposed a lockdown in six cities till April 26. The decision was, however, stayed by the Supreme Court after the state government challenged the High Court’s order.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!