DIMAPUR, JUNE 14 :The Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Peren, Somet Chumden Chang was on Tuesday scheduled to conduct a hearing on the limitation period with regard to the case of the educational qualification of chief minister TR Zeliang, as directed by the Kohima Bench of the Gauhati High Court.
On April 25 last, the Kohima Bench of the Gauhati High Court had ruled that a hearing on limitation be heard by the JMFC Peren, after a plea for the same from Zeliang’s counsel. Almost 2 months after the ruling, the first of the hearing by JMFC Peren was listed for Tuesday.
A limitation period generally refers to the timeframe within which affected parties must act to enforce their legal rights or seek redress after damage or injury. The expiry of this period extinguishes the parties’ legal remedies and also, in some cases, their legal rights.
The hearing, however, could not be held as Zeliang’s counsel asked the court for more time on Tuesday. Representing Zeliang, his counsel Imti Longjem appealed the court to grant 4 weeks time for the respondent to write an objection. This was furiously objected to by KN Balgopal, counsel for the complainant, saying that the respondent party had almost about 2 months’ time since the case was transferred to JMFC Peren by the Kohima Bench of the Gauhati High Court to write the objection.
He said that it was simply an attempt to “prolong the case” and questioned “is this the seriousness that the chief minister shows to such a serious case?” The JMFC told the respondent’s counsel that she agreed with complainant counsel’s observation. However “in the interest of justice”, she ruled that the respondent would be allowed a period of 2 weeks to submit the written reply.
The respondent’s counsel had reasoned that when the Kohima Bench of the Gauhati High Court had transferred the case to the JMFC Peren, it was ruled that the respondent could submit his objection to the court. The counsel insisted that he wanted to do so in written form.
The order stated that the copy of the same should be furnished to the complainant prior to the date fixed. The nest hearing has been listed for June 28 next. The counsel for the complainant also requested the court that no further adjournments be granted. This was allowed accordingly.
The hearing began at 10.30 am, without the presence of the respondent’s counsel who arrived only at 11 am. The complainant’s counsel termed it as a show of “disrespect” to the court. “This shows the irresponsibility of the chief minister that he cannot even send his representatives on time.”
He also questioned the respondent’s sincerity over the case, reminding that “there is lambasting in the society that the case is taking such a long time.” The counsel for the complainant further beseeched the court that the case was not a “light matter” and that “if convicted” the chief minister stands to be “disqualified immediately”. Such a high-profile case, he said, should not be kept pending for long.
NPF Central has said that the Congress party is trying to supersede the courts of law and define justice according to its whims and convenience which has been made amply loud and clear on the eve when the 1st Class Judicial Magistrate, Peren was scheduled to hear the case pertaining to the educational qualification issue of the Chief Minister today.
Quoting President DCC Peren Aluibe Iheilung as making stunning statement that justice has not been delivered even after lapse of almost 6 months of filing the complaint, the NPF asked, ”Are we to take it that convenience of the honourable Court to take up a matter is subject to the wishes of the petitioner, in this instant case the Congress party, and that failure on the part of the Honourable Court to take up the matter as per the political party’s desire, is failure of deliverance of justice?”
Press Bureau, NPF Central in a statement said, the insinuation declared in the media by the person regarding the posting of the Judicial Magistrate to Peren was deemed to have been done at the instigation/ influence of the “people in authority” is an insult to the independence and autonomy of the Judiciary, and needs serious scrutiny and consideration suo moto by the Judiciary.
“What is most galling is the disrespect shown to the Judicial Magistrate by the DCC Peren, and the author of the press statement, threatening the Magistrate that petitioner would take the matter up with the Supreme Court if justice is not delivered to the people in due time. How could the petitioner or the Congress party predict, or assume, that the ruling of the Magistrate would not be in accordance to what they want? At least, shouldn’t opportunity be given to the Magistrate to apply his mind on the matter? How could anyone threaten the Magistrate with consequences as made by the petitioner and the Congress party?”
The NPF said, the instant case is a personal matter of the Chief Minister and the NPF party has very little to do with it since it has been decided to let the legal matter follow a legal course till it reaches a logical conclusion.
Stating that a political party and certain politically-vested interests are hell-bent to sway public opinion even when the matter is subjudice, the NPF party said, the whole issue as ultra vires having political implications which, the party is of the opinion, does not auger well for the independent functioning of the Judiciary.
“After all, the High Court had earlier dismissed the petition filed by the DCC Peren, and by all logic, the DCC Peren has no moral or legal right to interfere in the Court proceedings like he did today with dozens of Congress workers in the Judicial Magistrate’s Court premises at Peren. He should have remained a silent spectator instead of issuing press statements a day prior to the Court hearing which amounts to trial by media, and which grossly undermines the independence of the judiciary.”
