A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi objected to to the fact that an adjournment was sought on account of senior counsel being unavailable, despite the case being listed as part-heard & top of the board.
The Supreme Court imposed a fine of ₹10,000 on Aminul Haque Laskar, a prominent figure in the Assam Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), for requesting an adjournment in a case involving Karim Uddin Barbhuiya, a leader of the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF).
Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi raised objections to the adjournment plea due to the unavailability of the petitioner’s primary counsel, Jaideep Gupta. They disapproved of the adjournment request, even though the case had already been partially heard and was a top priority on the docket. As a result, Laskar was charged a fine, with the funds earmarked for deposit into the Supreme Court Advocates’ Welfare Fund.
The case originated from Barbhuiya’s successful election to the Sonai Legislative Assembly constituency in 2021, where he defeated Laskar. Subsequently, Barbhuiya filed an election petition challenging Laskar’s election based on information obtained under the Right to Information Act (RTI Act). The petition alleged inconsistencies in the educational qualifications stated in the AIUDF leader’s election affidavit.
According to the petition, in an affidavit submitted to the Election Commission before the recent assembly elections in Assam, Barbhuiya claimed to have completed matriculation from Choudhury Charan Singh University in Meerut in 2019. However, the state education board had no record of him passing the class 12 exam. Despite this, the Commission permitted him to run for office, leading Laskar to file an election petition with the Supreme Court.
On April 26, the Gauhati High Court rejected Barbhuiya’s request to dismiss the election petition, prompting an immediate appeal to the Supreme Court. In May, the Supreme Court issued a notice and temporarily halted proceedings against Barbhuiya.
