The Bombay High Court’s order to allow the bail application for Shah Rukh Khan’s son Aryan Khan caused strong discontent among a section of lawyers who had applied and opposed the early hearing of the case.

After the Sessions Court rejected Aryan’s bail application on October 20, his lawyers were taken to the Bombay High Court and the case was listed on October 26. Upset by the hearing that lapsed, when bail requests for hundreds of others were under consideration for months, lawyers vehemently opposed it.

Social worker Prakash Ramanalal Pokharia submitted the application with the support of the lawyers community. Chief Advocate Subhash Jha argued in the Vakharya case and demanded that Aryan’s case not be given priority over those who had applied for bail in other matters before him.

Now, after Aryan has been released on bail, these lawyers claim that the Supreme Court did not consider their application. I mentioned the matter to the court and the honorable judge promised that he would give me time to hear it. “But he didn’t enjoy me at all,” Jha said.

Anand S. said: Gondal, the Supreme Court attorney who upheld the petition and was present in court during the hearing, “I was appalled to read the bail order issued by the High Court. The order states that there was no one present in court to defend the petition.”

Lawyer Sunil Lala added, “This is not realistically correct. We were there in court all day. We even told the judge that we were present and he should listen to us as well.

These lawyers had opposed the regular hearing of VIP cases. According to reports, 1,96,861 bail applications have been held for days, months and years depending on the cases before the various high courts in India.

Aryan’s case was not the first in which a Supreme Court granted a non-rotating date for the hearing. Outlook magazine earlier reported how TV presenter Arnab Goswami’s case on priority was listed and decided in the Supreme Court.

Fakhria’s request highlighted the disparity between the cases as stated in the statement, “…the defendants in all of those cases have been languishing in prison for a fairly long period, however, this esteemed court was pleased not to accept the request…”

“The applicant (Aryan Khan) does not deserve special treatment simply because he can afford to request the service of a great lawyer even if he seeks to negotiate. The message that would be sent otherwise is that there are differences in the level of rich and poor,” he added.

Source link

By admin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.