National Herald Case: Delhi HC Finds Sonia, Rahul Gandhi's Allegation 'Infructuous'

15/10/2015 3:18 PM IST | Updated 15/07/2016 8:25 AM IST
NEW! HIGHLIGHT AND SHARE
Highlight text to share via Facebook and Twitter
Hindustan Times via Getty Images
NEW DELHI, INDIA - SEPTEMBER 20: Congress Vice President Rahul Gandhi and Congress President Sonia Gandhi during the Kisan Samman Rally at Ramlila Maidan on September 20, 2015 in New Delhi, India. During the rally, Sonia Gandhi said, “This victory is not only the victory of Congress party, it's the victory for all the farmers”. While Rahul said, every person has mother. There is no one who doesn't have mother. When we cry, we remember our mother, when we are happy, we remember our mother. The Congress organised the rally to greet farmers and party workers for 'forcing' Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government to withdraw the 'draconian' land ordinance. (Photo by Arvind Yadav/Hindustan Times via Getty Images)

NEW DELHI -- Delhi High Court today termed as "infructuous" the applications moved by Congress President Sonia Gandhi, her son Rahul and some other party leaders alleging a "different treatment" was meted out to a challenge filed by them in the National Herald case.

The Congress leaders in their application had opposed the transfer of the case from the court of Justice Sunil Gaur who had part-heard the matter for eight months to another court of Justice P S Teji.

Justice Gaur today termed their "applications" as infructuous as the matter has been listed before him by the high court registry.

The judge also said that he had not recused from the matter and added that the petitions came back to him as it was part-heard by him.

Even senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Sonia Gandhi, agreed with the court that the applications had become infructuous and also added that they can be withdrawn.

The court, thereafter, said it will hear arguments in the matter at 2.30 PM today.

The Gandhis in their application had said their petition challenging a trial court order in the case was transferred in violation of the procedures and practice being followed by the court.

The application also said that their challenge petition ought to have been listed before the bench of Justice Gaur before whom the matter was pending for over eight months and was heard by him at length on several occasions.

"The matter being actually part heard ought to have been listed before the bench of Justice Sunil Gaur before whom the matter was pending for over eight months and was heard by him at length on several occasions.

"Even as per the established procedure and practice of this court, the registry ought to have placed this matter before the very same Judge where the matter was part heard especially when the same has been clarified and appended to the Roster Modification Notice itself," the application said.

Also Read: Silent Wedding Reel Of Sonia And Rajiv Gandhi Is Charm Immaculate

​​ Like Us On Facebook |
Follow Us On Twitter |
Contact HuffPost India

More On This Topic