Harshad Mehta’s kin want judge to opt out

Ten members of ‘Big Bull’ Harshad Mehta’s family have filed an application before the Bombay high court, alleging that justice DK Deshmukh, who is presiding over the special court trying cases arising out of the 1992 stock market scam, is biased against them and that he should recuse himself from hearing the cases.

The recusation application, not very common, has 24 petitioners, including Mehta’s wife Jyoti, mother Rasila, brothers Ashwin and Sudhir, and sister-in-law Rina, besides 11 companies owned and promoted by the family.

The petitioners have expressed apprehension that the special court is biased against them and that “the doors of justice are getting shut on them”.

Senior counsel SB Jaisinghani, appearing on behalf of the Mehtas, argued on Friday, “You cannot accuse bias, you can only tolerate it. But after tolerating it for some time, I (petitioners) am going to assert myself.”  

Justice Deshmukh, who is hearing the application himself, will take a decision — whether to recuse himself from the case or not — after hearing the arguments of the petitioners and the custodian, who was appointed under the Special Court (trial of offences relating to transactions in securities) Act.

Jaisinghani said, “It is not easy to file these applications. These are sensitive matters.” Though the sale of Mehta’s eight flats in Worli’s Madhuli building was not confirmed, justice Deshmukh had said that the highest bid (Rs32.60 crore) would survive, he said.
Jaisinghani said when the Mehtas’ counsel sought a two-week adjournment in August, a cost of Rs10,000 was imposed on them. “[The] lordship’s order is good in law but what about my (petitioners’) feelings?” Jaisinghani said.

The Mehta’s counsel, IH Sayed, was once told to sit down when he tried to address the court and was warned that if he did not he would be physically thrown out of the court, Jaisinghani said.

Mehta’s property, auctioned by the court, was bagged by stockbroker Ashok Samani on February 13.

Rasila was granted permission by the Supreme Court to bid for the property but justice Deshmukh did not permit her to do so as she could not pay the earnest money of Rs80 lakh.

The Mehtas were notified by the custodian and their assets were attached in 1992, holding that they received more than Rs1,700 crore from Harshad through the purchase of shares and debentures from April 1990 to June 1992, the peak period before the stock market crash that the ‘Big Bull’ had allegedly masterminded.

The supreme court, however, reversed the order and permitted Rasila to bid, directing the special court to consider fresh bids.

“Such illegal orders have caused a delay of six years by shuttling between the high court and the Supreme Court,” Jaisinghani said.

But Shiraz Rustomjee and Leena Adhvaryu, the counsels for the custodian, contended that this was only a tactic to frustrate the proceedings of the sale of flats in Worli. “The allegation of bias was never raised before the supreme court,” Rustomjee said.
Justice Deshmukh will continue to hear the arguments next week.