Met To Invite CM For Daughter's Wedding: Clarification By Kerala HC After Chief Justice's 40-Minute Meeting With CM Fuels Speculation
The Kerala High Court has issued a press release clarifying that the Chief Justice of the High Court had met the Chief Minister to invite him to the wedding of the former's daughter.
As per media reports, Chief Justice S. Manikumar met the Chief Minister of Kerala Pinarayi Vijayan today at the Ernakulam Government Guest House and the meeting lasted for around 40 minutes.
The press release alleged that a "Section of the Visual Media" is "creating and assigning reasons beyond comprehension" about the meeting.
"The aired news clips bear no semblance, whatsoever, with actual facts. Creating facts and assigning it to suitable circumstances do not stand in good stead towards the cause of fair reporting", the press release by the Public Relations Officer of the High Court said.
The press release also said that the displeasure of the High Court in "telecasting the news item with fabricated interpretations of a false nature" is being conveyed.
The press release does not mention anything about the duration of the meeting to invite the Chief Minister to a wedding, which, as per the media, lasted for around 40 minutes.
FIR against KHCAA President for collecting money to bribe Judges
The Chief Justice has met the Chief Minister, who is also the Home Minister of the state, at the time when an FIR has been registered by the state police against the President of the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association (KHCAA), Advocate Saiby Jose Kidangoor.
Advocate Saiby Kidangoor has already approached the High Court seeking to quash the FIR.
The FIR was registered under Section 420 of the IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and it states that Advocate Saiby Kidangoor collected money from his clients between 19 July, 2020 and 29 April, 2022 stating that it is to be given to Judges who will hear the cases, with an intention to make unlawful gain and thereby cheated his clients and the parties on the opposite side and acted against the rule of law.
The police then applied to amend the FIR to add that the money was collected by the advocate with an intention to give it to the Judges. Moreover, the FIR says that the parties on the opposite side were cheated by the advocate. The occasion for that will arise only if the bribe was given to any Judge in a case where the opposite party is alleged to have been cheated.