SC fines Adarsh Scam accused for filing repetitive bail applications

New Delhi, Sep 17 : The Supreme Court has imposed a Rs 25,000 fine on Raj Kumar Modi, an the accused in the Adarsh scam case, for repeatedly filing bail applications, terming it as an abuse of the process of law.

A bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and S. Ravindra Bhat, said: “Repetitive filing of applications amounts to abuse of process of law. This application is filed in spite of the order passed by this Court categorically stating that no further application for extension of interim bail shall be entertained.”

The fine was imposed after the bench heard another petition filed by Raj Kumar Modi seeking interim bail.

MS Education Academy

The apex court noted that he was granted bail for a period of two months on June 15 on the ground that his mother was seriously ill.

Later, he filed an application for further extending the interim bail for six months on the ground that his mother passed away and he had to perform certain rituals.

He also informed the court that his wife was suffering from serious ailments.

On August 10, the top court extended the interim bail for a month and directed the petitioner to surrender on or before September 15.

“It was made clear that no application for extension of interim bail shall be entertained. We gave liberty to the petitioner to file an application for bail if the Special Leave Petitions are not finally heard, within a period of six months,” noted the bench.

Later, another bail application was filed on the ground that Raj Kumar Modi was suffering from epididymitis.

While submitting the plea, senior advocate K.V. Viswanathan, appearing for the petitioner, said that unless properly treated, epididymitis can lead to complications.

He also pointed out that the number of Covid-19 patients in jails were increasing.

The bench said repetitive filing of applications amounts to abuse of process of law.

Additional Solicitor General Aman Lekhi, representing the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), argued that the top court should treat this matter seriously as the applicant is repeatedly filing for interim bail.

Disclaimer: This story is auto-generated from IANS service.

Subscribe us on The Siasat Daily - Google News
Back to top button