The judge had given a one-line decision, details were uploaded after retirement, SC sought a report from the High Court

New Delhi : Corruption case. Against an IRS officer. Case of disproportionate assets. Madras High Court judge dismissed the case by giving a one-line verdict. CBI asked for a copy of the detailed order but did not get it on time. The agency claims that it received the detailed order when the judge who gave the verdict had retired. This entire incident is 7-7 and a half years old. Now CBI has challenged the Madras High Court’s verdict in the Supreme Court. The apex court has sought a report from the Madras High Court on this. A judge of Madras High Court had given a one-line order in a CBI case. The entire order was uploaded on the website only when the judge retired. CBI has made this claim. Now the Supreme Court has sought a report from the Madras High Court in this case. The judge had given this order to dismiss a corruption case. CBI has appealed in the Supreme Court in this case.

This case is related to the disproportionate assets case against an IRS officer. The CBI has challenged the Madras High Court’s decision in this case in the Supreme Court. A bench of Supreme Court Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih is hearing this case.

According to a report in the Economic Times, the CBI has told the Supreme Court that Justice T Mathivanan of the Madras High Court had passed a one-line order in the case on May 15, 2017. The same day, the CBI had applied for a certified copy of the order. The CBI alleges that the registry told them that the detailed order from the judge’s office has not been received yet. Justice Mathivanan retired on May 26, 2017. The CBI received a certified copy of this order on July 26, 2017.

The Supreme Court has directed the Registrar General of the Madras High Court to inform on what date the detailed judgment was received by the registry from the judge’s office and when the detailed judgment was uploaded on the website. The Supreme Court has also asked whether there was any administrative direction from the Chief Justice of the High Court to hear the 9 cases heard by the judge afresh and whether the present case was included in those 9 cases?

The CBI says the judge had passed a one-line order in the court on May 15, 2017. The agency has told the apex court, “A one-line order was passed in the court on May 15, 2017 and on the same day, it applied for a certified copy of the order.” The CBI alleges that the registry verbally informed the CBI that the detailed order has not yet been received from the office of the judge.

The agency further alleged that the registry verbally informed the CBI that the detailed order was yet to be received from the judge’s office. Justice Mathivanan retired on May 26, 2017. According to the petition, the CBI was given a certified copy of the order on July 26, 2017.