#BombayHighCourt begins hearing the plea of Lawyers Collective challenging the summons issued by ED for appearance of Sr Adv Anand Grover before them in the capacity of the trustee of the NGO.

@LCHIVWRI
@IJaising
@dir_ed

Bench of Justices SS Shinde and MS Karnik ask ASG Anil Singh where the other Sr Advs are.

ASG: Milords had this been physical hearing, I would have located them, it is difficult during virtual hearing.

All Laugh.
Court states that the officers of ED are willing to come to Mumbai to carry out interrogation and they can proceed with the interrogation subject to the outcome of the plea.

Sr Adv Amit Desai asks the court to note certain facts from the plea.
Desai submits that ED has claimed they do not have certain documents with them. We have submitted those records, these are public records, but we will provide them with whatever additional documents they want.
Desai: So I am submitting that those documents can be sent to the ED, they can go through the documents and then take further course of action.
Court asks ASG to consider if the hearing of the ED can be deferred beyond January 6, 2021.

ASG: Milords the petitioner cannot have a choice on the investigation. This investigation is at preliminary stage. I am only talking about recording of statement.
Court: They are not saying stay the investigation, they are only deferring the hearing.

You were not there in a previous hearing, Mr. Ponda was there and Ms Gonsalves was there for CBI.

CBI had made a statement that they will complete investigation in a certain time.
Court: Thereafter they have sought for more time.

Investigation officers have full liberty to conduct their investigation.

We will hear your matter in first week of January, 2021.
ASG argues that if the hearing is deferred then it will send a wrong signal that the hearing is deferred.

Court: What we are saying is that whatever date you fix for recording their statement, just do it after January 6.
ASG: Milords lawyers are coming to court everyday, can they not go for recording statements?

I am willing to send my officers for recording statement if they cannot come to Delhi.
Desai: There are lots of jurisdictional issues. I have read the reply of Mr. Singh and he has fairly said that there are substantial questions of law which I agree.

I am also saying that they are asking me to bring the documents, I am only saying I will send the documents
Desai: You study those documents in the meanwhile and then take further course.

Desai gets disconnected from the call.

Court: Mr. Singh we will take this matter on December 22. Now time is over.
ASG: Milords I will take instructions on the date and milords can keep it tomorrow just for instructions and not for arguments.

Court: Ok we will record that and extend the earlier order till tomorrow.
Hearing will continue tomorrow only for the purpose of Mr. Singh’s reply on the issue of deferring the date for recording of statement of Sr Adv Grover on behalf of Lawyers Collective.

More from Bar & Bench

More from Law

We need to talk about the 'expert' witness statement evidence led by Ms Bell in her successful case before the Tavistock. THREAD

You can see who gave evidence in her support from these extracts from the Tavistock's Skeleton Argument.


Helpful for you to bear in mind that her solicitor was a man called Paul Conrathe, who has a long association with the religious right in the US (I have talked about him a number of times but this is as good a starting point as any).


I am not going to address here other criticisms that might be made of the form in which that evidence was given or the timing of its service before the court. I am just going to address, in alphabetical order, the individuals whose evidence Mr Conrathe led on Ms Bell's behalf.

The first witness, alphabetically, was Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Oxford, Michael Biggs.

Mr Biggs was exposed for posting transphobic statements online under a fake twitter handle: @MrHenryWimbush according to this report.

You May Also Like

Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel was previously CEO of bioMerieux in France from 07-10.

Alain Merieux, who owns bioMerieux, was instrumental in the creation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology P4 Lab.

The same people who helped create the virus, also helped to create the vaccines...


Moderna partnered with French Pasteur Institute in 2015 to develop mRNA vaccine technology.

Pasteur Institute partnered with the Wuhan P4 Laboratory in 2017 along with the Merieux Foundation to study emerging viruses...
https://t.co/yFsHwrNYaK
https://t.co/9M5lydBKhM


Nobel prize winning scientist Luc Montagnier asserts that Sars-Cov-2 is man-made and originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Montagnier did extensive work with the Pasteur Institute in France which was partnered with the Wuhan P4.

Merieux Foundation & the Chinese government have worked together since 1965, and partnered to study emerging pathogens in Africa in 2015.

Their research included "PATHOGENS CARRIED BY BATS" that provoke respiratory diseases.

🚨🚨🚨
https://t.co/gVwpT0ssqI