In a striking development, the Supreme Court has called Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra to explain his involvement in a case where crucial facts were allegedly concealed in an appeal. This comes after Advocate-on-Record (AoR) Jaydip Pati submitted an affidavit stating that he signed off on the appeal without realizing key details were missing—doing so at Malhotra’s request.
A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih, clearly alarmed by the situation, remarked that this kind of oversight was becoming a trend, especially in remission cases where information is withheld from the Court.
“Mr. Jaydip Pati, Advocate-on-Record, has filed an affidavit. To say the least, the contents are shocking,” the Court declared, before issuing a notice to Malhotra, requesting him to appear and explain.
This controversy centers around an appeal linked to a convict serving a 30-year sentence for kidnapping. The appeal for remission of the sentence failed to mention a prior Supreme Court decision restoring the full term. Pati’s affidavit claimed he signed the documents without doubting Malhotra’s intentions, citing their professional relationship—Pati had been working in Malhotra’s chamber as his junior.
“The deponent never doubted the bona fides of Mr. Rishi Malhotra,” Pati wrote, adding that he now deeply regrets signing the appeal without thoroughly scrutinizing it.
Despite this explanation, the Court is far from satisfied. It issued a strong warning to AoRs, reminding them not to act merely as signing authorities and underscoring the importance of careful scrutiny in legal matters.
The matter is set for further hearings on October 21, with Malhotra required to provide his response in court.