In Brief
A retired Supreme Court Judge filed a Special Leave Petition challenging the High Court's order directing an enquiry into a private telephone conversation between him and a suspended Munsif. The conversation was annexed to an Intervention Application seeking to reopen a COVID-19 related PIL after the High Court had closed preliminary objection hearings. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in directing the enquiry because: (1) the PIL's preliminary hearing was closed; (2) the petitioner received no notice or opportunity to be heard; (3) the conversation was unrelated to the maintainability question; and (4) the authenticity was later admitted. The Court set aside the enquiry direction and remanded the PIL for hearing on maintainability and merits.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.