Raja tried to influence Madras HC judge

CHENNAI/NEW DELHI: In yet another embarrassment for the UPA, the Madras High Court on Tuesday confirmed that it was A Raja, who in 2009, allegedly tried to influence a High Court judge’s decision in a case being probed by the CBI.

The court also suspended from the bar a top lawyer, RK Chandramohan, who was allegedly involved in the attempt to influence the judge at the minister’s behalf.

A division bench, comprising Justice FM Ibrahim Khalifulla and Justice MM Sundaresh, passed the order suspending Chandramohan from the bar. “He should not be permitted to function as such pending disciplinary action by the Bar Council of India,” the bench said.

Disposing of a petition by a lawyer, the bench appended a portion of a letter written by a former judge of the court Justice S Reghupati, who had reported that Chandramohan had entered his chamber last year and pleaded that the case of a father and a son, accused in a marks scandal case in Puducherry, for anticipatory bail be considered favourably as they were “family friends of a Union minister by name Raja.” The lawyer handed over his mobile phone to the judge saying that the “Union minister is on the line to have a talk with me.”

“I discouraged such conduct of Chandramohan and told him that the case would be disposed of in accordance with law, if listed before me,” Justice Reghupati had said in his letter of July 7, 2009 to the then Chief Justice of Madras High Court.

Justice Reghupati, who has since retired, had in his letter, complained about the Chandramohan’s “outburst and uncontrollable” behaviour to the then Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan.

Earlier, the judge had in the open court last year alleged that a Union minister, through a lawyer, attempted to speak to him on telephone seeking favours in a case being investigated by CBI posted the matter to another judge. But he had not named the minister.

In his letter to the CJI, Justice Reghupati had observed that ”a counsel, who made an attempt to exert influence on the court by using the name of a Cabinet minister, cannot be allowed to succeed in snatching an order in his favour by advancing threat.” The then CJI had told the media that the judge had sent a report to him making it clear that no Union minister spoke to him directly.