Facing scrutiny from the Supreme Court for his comments casting aspersions on the judiciary, Telangana chief minister Revanth Reddy expressed regret in a statement issued on Friday. The statement posted on X came a day after the Supreme Court criticised him during a hearing on a petition seeking the transfer of the trial related to a 2015 cash-for-vote case outside Telangana.
“I have the highest regard and full faith in the Indian Judiciary. I understand that certain press reports dated 29th August, 2024 containing comments attributed to me have given the impression that I am questioning the judicial wisdom of the Hon’ble Court. I reiterate that I am a firm believer of the judicial process. I unconditionally express my regret for the statements reflected in the press reports,“ Reddy said.
He said the remarks attributed to him were taken out of context. “I have unconditional respect & highest regard for the Judiciary & its independence. As a firm believer in the Constitution of India and its ethos, I have and continue to hold the Judiciary in its highest esteem.”
This regret follows a rebuke from the Supreme Court, where a bench led by Justice BR Gavai expressed concern over Reddy’s remarks relating to the bail granted to Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha in the Delhi excise policy case this week.
On Thursday, the bench questioned whether Reddy’s comments suggested that the court’s decisions were influenced by political considerations. “Do we decide on political considerations?”Justice Gavai asked, highlighting the gravity of the allegations.
The bench, which also included justices PK Mishra and KV Viswanathan, was visibly irked by Reddy’s insinuation that a political deal between the BRS and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) might have led to the court granting bail to Kavitha. The court had initially been inclined to dismiss the petition for transferring the trial in the 2015 case but reconsidered its stance after learning of Reddy’s remarks, which it deemed inappropriate for a person holding a high office.
“We are not foreclosing the issue of transfer [of the case]…Should such statements be made by a responsible chief minister of a state? If such is the sort of statements he is making, that may rightly bring apprehensions in the minds of any person that the trial against him can be influenced,” said the bench on Thursday.
Reddy’s comments cropped up in the context of the 2015 cash-for-vote scandal, where he, then an assembly member of the Telugu Desam Party, allegedly offered a ₹50 lakh bribe to secure a favourable vote in a legislative election.
In response to Kavitha’s bail after five months in custody, Reddy speculated that her release was part of a political arrangement between the BRS and BJP. The Supreme Court condemned the claim.
Justice Gavai, drawing parallels with a contempt notice issued against an Indian Administrative Service officer from Maharashtra suggesting that the court does not follow the law, emphasised the seriousness of Reddy’s allegations.
“If somebody has the audacity to say that we pass orders in consultation with political parties, that alone should be sufficient to entertain the transfer petition. Let him face trial outside the state,” he said.
Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Sidharth Luthra, representing Reddy, acknowledged the gravity of the situation. Rohatgi assured the court that they would address the matter. Luthra clarified that Reddy’s comments were part of a broader political exchange, which unfortunately had been misinterpreted.
Reddy’s expression of regret came as the court was set to revisit the issue of transferring the trial on Monday.