Addressing the media here, he said the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by Congress leaders only to defame BJP national president Amit Shah and sought an apology from AICC president Rahul Gandhi.
"Issue a press statement (the draft is being sent by email), hold a press conference by discussing with lawyers and with ideal understanding of the judgment, retweet the tweets by central BJP leaders on this issue". There was no suspicion at all in the death of Judge BH Loya.
The Maharashtra government had argued in the apex court that all pleas seeking an independent probe into Loya's death were motivated and aimed at targeting "one individual" in the guise of upholding the rule of law.More news: Gurriel shines in debut as Jays top Yankees
More news: Sixers center Joel Embiid is doubtful for Game 3 against Heat
More news: Syracuse Frat Suspended for Staggeringly Racist Video
A three-judge bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud said, "We have come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no merit in the writ petitions". He wrote, "The four judges of the Supreme Court who held the controversial Press Conference are all experienced judges and in my view men of high integrity".
He also said a "conspiracy" allegedly hatched by the Congress to frame Shah in a false case was "badly unmasked" before the people.
The apex court said during arguments, counsel for petitioners forgot to maintain institutional civility towards judges and made wild allegations. "Business rivalries have to be resolved in a competitive market for goods and services". In its order, the top court called the petitions "frivolous and motivated", which were filed to settle political rivalry. "This court would be failing in its duty if it were not to stand by them", it said. But it was clear the petition was a veiled attempt to launch a frontal attack on the independence of the judiciary and to dilute the credibility of judicial institutions, the bench said, but stopped short of taking action against the petitioners and the lawyers.
The top court, which was critical of the petitioners and their lawyers for casting insinuations against the judicial officers and judges, said an attempt was made to cause prejudice against them and was a "vituperative assault on the judiciary". They alleged that junior judges were given sensitive and high profile cases subverting the norm of the Supreme Court.