The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed strong disapproval of Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy’s remarks concerning the bail granted to BRS leader K Kavitha in the Delhi excise policy scam case. The top court highlighted that such comments from a high-ranking official could potentially undermine public confidence in the judiciary.
During a heated session, the bench, led by Justice B R Gavai, addressed the implications of Reddy’s statement that hinted at a possible collusion between the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) to secure Kavitha’s bail. “What sort of statement is this by a responsible chief minister? That might rightly create apprehension in the minds of people. Is this a kind of statement which should be made by a chief minister?” Justice Gavai questioned, stressing the importance of maintaining respect for judicial independence.
The controversy stems from comments made by CM Reddy in a recent interaction with media, where he speculated on the quick bail received by Kavitha compared to the delayed bail for other politicians like Manish Sisodia and Arvind Kejriwal, suggesting political motivations. “It is a fact that BRS worked for the victory of the BJP in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls. There is also talk that Kavitha got bail because of the deal between BRS and BJP,” Reddy had alleged.
The bench, which also includes Justices P K Mishra and K V Viswanathan, reiterated the judiciary’s commitment to act without political influence. “Why should they drag court in political rivalry? Do we pass orders on consultations with political parties? We are not bothered by politicians or if anybody criticises our orders. We do our duty as per conscience and oath,” the justices declared.
The apex court was hearing a petition seeking the transfer of the trial in the 2015 cash-for-vote scam case, involving Reddy, from Telangana to Bhopal. This hearing provided a backdrop for the court to affirm its fundamental duty to maintain mutual respect for institutions and uphold the principle of non-interference between the legislative and judicial branches.
