Supreme Court Refuses Bail To Subrata Roy

0
0

Subrata Cover Pic 01The Supreme Court rejected arguments by Sahara Group Chief Subrata Roy’s lawyers thus refusing to his grant bail plea, instructing him that a favourable order could be considered only after Sahara Group comes up with a new proposal to refund Rs 20,000 crore to investors.

Subrata Roy has claimed that he is only a minority shareholder in the two companies and not involved in their day today running, and, hence, should not be held guilty of violating the court’s order.

In a bid to move the special bench comprising Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan and Justice J.S. Khehar, Subrata Roy’s counsel Ram Jethmalani pleaded for bail and to allow him to be with his family for Holi and meet his ailing mother.

The Supreme Court Bench once again turned down Sahara Group’s offer as Senior Counsel Ram Jethmalani, appearing for Subrata Roy, made an oral offer to pay Rs 2,500 crore out of the Rs 20,000 crore crore now and the rest in installments.

“We have repeatedly been saying what is your proposal. Tell us how much you can pay now the key is in your hands.” stated The Supreme Court Bench.

“Prayer made by Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, for bail cannot be considered at this juncture, since no written proposal for payment in compliance with the directions issued by this court has been made so far,” the bench said.

Arguing for Subrata Roy, who has been in jail since March 04, 2014 Ram Jethmalani further added that raising the amount would not be possible until Subrata Roy remains in jail since only he can arrange the money.

However, The Supreme Court Bench refused to grant the bail, pointing out that it had given Subrata Roy enough time for the last one and half years and asked the SEBI counsel to argue on the maintainability of the petition.

This hearing was in response to Roy’s petition challenging his detention on the ground that it was illegal and unconstitutional.

Responding to Ram Jethmalani’s plea that it could be embarrassing to argue before the same bench, the court said, “We have gone through the petition and nothing is embarrassing in it.”

The next hearing is due March 25, 2014.