Will lay down law on High Court's revoking orders dictated in open courts: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday said it will lay down the guidelines and Standrad Operating Procedure (SOP) on the issue of High Courts revoking orders dictated in open courts, and subsequently rehearing the matter.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih made this observation after coming across a case in which the Madras High Court had earlier quashed a money laundering case against a former IPS officer, M S Jaffer Sait, but later on, modified its direction and reheard the matter.

While widening the scope of the case, the court ordered the proceedings before the High Court would remained stayed.

The court also directed the proceedings against the officer would also remain stayed in connection with the ED's case.

On September 6, the court had sought a report from the High Court's Registrar General.

"The report indicates that the petitioner was earlier allowed by the concerned bench. The prayer in that petition was for quashing of the ECIR. Several issues will have to be gone into including the issue of

the manner in which orders have been passed by the High

Court," the bench said, after hearing senior advocate Sidharth Luthra for the petitioner.

The petitioner claimed on August 21 2024, the criminal petition was allowed by the High Court.

Subsequently, the case was reheard and now judgment has been reserved. Though objection was raised at the time of rehearing of the petition, it was discarded by the High Court, he claimed.

The accused, Sait, had moved the apex court and submitted that his case was reheard within days after his plea of quashing was allowed by the Madras HC.

Sait is an accused in the alleged illegal allotment of a Tamil Nadu Housing Board plot. A complaint was made in 2011 accusing him of having gotten illegal allotment of Tamil Nadu Housing Board plots at Thiruvanmiyur in Chennai. Following this, the DVAC (Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption) registered an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

On September 30, the top court had called the decision of the high court to re-hear the matter as 'absolutely wrong'.

Earlier on August 21, the HC's two-judge bench, led by Justice S M Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam, quashed the proceedings against Sait on the grounds that the corruption case registered by the DVAC, which is the predicate offence for the ED case, has already been quashed by the high court.

However, subsequently, the order was revoked and the matter was reheard and judgment was reserved.

Sait, in his plea, contended that in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, the apex court had held that if a person is finally discharged/acquitted of the scheduled offence or the criminal case against him is quashed by the court of competent jurisdiction, there can be no offence of money-laundering against him.