Summary
The Supreme Court discontinued an inquiry into the authenticity of a recorded conversation after the retired judge concerned admitted the conversation and supplied an accepted English transcript. The pending public-interest litigation concerned COVID-19 measures; the High Court’s immediate inquiry should have remained confined to its maintainability. Any reliance on the transcript affecting the non-party retired judge required an opportunity to him. Neither the PIL’s merits nor its maintainability was decided.
Issues
- Whether the directed authenticity inquiry should continue after the conversation and corrected transcript were admitted.
- What procedural protection was required before the High Court relied on the transcript.
Held
- The purpose of the reference to the retired Supreme Court judge was to establish authenticity and genuineness. Admission of the conversation to the extent recorded in the petitioner’s Annexure P-16 removed the need to continue that inquiry. The admission was not an acceptance of every earlier transcription or allegation. (¶¶ 5-6, 12)
- At the relevant stage, the High Court had reserved its decision on the PIL’s maintainability. It ought not to have embarked on an inquiry beyond that question; the conversation and proposed report were relevant only to that stated purpose. (¶ 13-14)
- If the High Court wished to refer to the admitted transcript, it could do so only after giving the present petitioner, Justice V. Eswaraiah, an opportunity. The Supreme Court left the pending PIL, including maintainability, for the High Court without expressing an opinion on either issue. (¶ 15-16)
Result
SLP disposed of; the directed authenticity inquiry discontinued. High Court left to decide the PIL, including maintainability, with an opportunity to the petitioner before any reliance on his transcript. Intervention applications not entertained.