In Brief
Ms. Indira Jaising, counsel for an intervenor in the main case, sought expungement of remarks in the judgment describing the conduct of petitioners and intervenors as scandalous and lacking in bona fides. The Supreme Court held that the critical observations in paragraphs 76 and 78 specifically addressed the collective conduct of "the petitioners and the intervenors," not Ms. Jaising personally. The Court found that if counsel identifies with the intervenor, that is a matter of perception. Since the findings were based on what was argued during the hearing and addressed collective conduct, the application was disposed of without expunging the remarks.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.