PIL alleging Uddhav Thackeray holds disproportionate assets: Bombay High Court CJ Dipankar Datta recuses

Chief Justice Dipankar Datta of the Bombay High Court recused from hearing the plea seeking probe into the alleged disproportionate assets belonging to former Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and his family [Gouri Bhide and Anr. vs Union of India and Ors.].The CJ recused from the case after examining a report submitted by the High Court registrar regarding the clearance to be given to the petitioner, Gouri Bhide, to appear in person.After seeing the report, the CJ and Justice Abhay Ahuja, who was the other judge on the bench. discussed among themselves before Justice Ahuja pointed out something to the CJ.CJ Datta then proceeded to recused from the hearing."Matter to be placed before the appropriate bench," the bench recorded in the order..The PIL filed by Bhide claimed that although Uddhav, his son Aditya, and wife Rashmi have never disclosed any service, profession or business as their official source of income; yet they had properties worth crores in Mumbai and Raigad districts.It was stated that recent raids by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in Maharashtra revealed that close aides of Uddhav, Aditya and Rashmi were closely interrogated and were under the radar of the agencies.The petitioner further expressed astonishment at periodicals 'Marmik' and 'Saamna' - run by the Thackeray family - never being subjected to the Audit Bureau of Circulation (ABC) and claimed that during the lockdown, when print media in the country was facing heavy losses, the company ‘Prabodhan Prakashan Pvt. Ltd.’, practically owned by Thackeray family, showed a huge turnover of ₹42 crores and booked a profit of ₹11.5 crores.In view of the above, she claimed that it was a clear case of turning black money to white.She further stated that although she had filed a complaint with the Police Commissioner, Mumbai which was also forwarded to Economic Offences Wing (EOW), no action was taken and was she not informed about the status of her complaint either.This prompted her to file the PIL, it was submitted.The petition therefore sought directions to the State to take cognisance of the complaint filed with Mumbai Police and to the respondent agencies to submit status of investigation every month to the court.Notably, Bhide in her PIL also stated that she had a hunch that BJP leader Kirit Somaiya or even CBI and ED must have huge information and links pertaining to Uddhav, Rashmi, Aditya and Tejas Thackeray..The court had in an earlier hearing asked the petitioner to clear the procedural objections raised by the High Court registry which are raised when fresh petitions are filed.The registrar in turn was asked to interact with her and then take a decision on whether the petitioner was competent to appear before the Court in person to argue the plea filed by her.The Court noted from the report that the petitioner may not be able to answer all the legal queries and asked the petitioner if she wished to appoint a lawyer. Before the petitioner could answer, CJ Datta recused from hearing the case.