Justice Surya Kant while hearing the matter seeking for anticipatory bail, in the matter the counsel for the appellant claimed to be a “petty offence”, the personal experience was shared by Justice Surya Kant of theft in his agricultural land. It was stated by Justice Surya Kant that when the caretaker of his land went to the police station to lodge a complaint. It was commented by the Station House Officer that the Chief was granted bail by the Court just a few days ago. Justice Surya Kant, while sharing his personal experience remarked that he has some agricultural land and the tube-well. In the early morning he was called upon by the caretaker and was informed that theft had taken place and copper wires from pole to tube-well had been stolen. Justice Kant asked him to level complaint with the local police. Adding to it, The SHO remarked ‘What to do? Yeah, jo chor hain usko parso hi Court mein produce kiya tha”. (Day before yesterday the chief was produced before the Court), stated by Justice Surya Kant. Justice Surya Kant stated that A comment was made by the Judge, when a lawyer seeking bail for his client argued that the case was of a “petty offence”. It was observed that the offence was not serious, the concerns were that his client was involved in 14 cases. The bench comprising of Justice Surya Kant and the Justice J.B. Pardiwala observed in the matter where the counsel appraised the bench that the appellant had secured bail in all the other matters. Justice Kant reckoned, while taking note of his involvement in the 14 cases that the appellant has not mended his way. Further, it was retorted by Justice Kant that “Once you are granted bail. That is another problem, you start the same business.” In the present matter, while denying the plea for anticipatory bail, it was directed by the bench to the appellant to surrender and apply for regular bail. The bench noticed that the trail court shall hear the matter and decide the matter expeditiously. In the previous occasion, while hearing cases related to air pollution in Delhi, Justice Surya Kant stated that he is still a farmer and that he does agricultural activities at his native place. The remark was made by Justice Kant when the issue of stubble burning came in debate. Further it was stated by him that he is himself a farmer and he was in a position to understand the difficulties faced by farmers. However, he lamented that no one was concerned with the plight of farmers, in what circumstances they are compelled to resort to stubble burning, and these scientific reports being suggested by the Governments, the reason why they are unable to follow it. Justice Surya Kant stated that People keep blaming farmers sitting in 5 stars in Delhi that 4%,5% is attributed to them After agrarian laws, what happened to their landholdings? can they afford these machines, With such small landholdings? If you actually have any scientific alternative, propose it to them, they’ll adopt them, it will help them out.
