The second most senior Supreme Court judge J Chelameswar shot off a letter to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra, seeking a full court discussion on the issue of alleged government interference in the functioning of the judiciary. Copies of Chelameswar's letter, written on March 21, were also sent to 22 other apex court judges. This unprecedented letter questioned the probe initiated by Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari against District and Sessions Judge Krishna Bhat at the instance of Union Ministry of Law and Justice, despite his name being recommended for elevation twice by the Collegium.
In his six-page letter, Chelameswar, number two in the apex court hierarchy, raised the issue of judicial independence and wrote: "We, the judges of the Supreme Court of India, are being accused of ceding our independence and our institutional integrity to the Executive's incremental encroachment." Asking CJI Misra to take up the issue of the executive's interference in the judiciary by convening a full court on the judicial side, Justice Chelameswar said that such a step was necessary in order to ensure that the institution of the Supreme Court remained relevant under the scheme of the Constitution.
Further, taking serious note of the communication between the Karnataka High Court Chief Justice and the executive, Chelameswar said the role of the high court ceased with its recommendation. He said that any correspondence, clarificatory or otherwise, had to be between the executive and the Supreme Court.
In January, the four senior-most Supreme Court judges had held an unprecedented press conference and raised the issue of assignment of cases. The Supreme Court judges had met the media to complain that the administration of the country's top court was not in order. At a hurriedly called press conference at the residence of Justice Chelameswar, they had said it was with "no pleasure" that they had been compelled to make public what they were upset with. The other three judges involved were Justices Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph.
Here are the highlights of Justice J Chelameswar's letter to Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra:
1) 'Death knell for democracy': Any "bonhomie" between the judiciary and the government would sound the "death knell" for democracy, Chelameswar told the CJI in his letter. "Let us also not forget the bonhomie between the judiciary and the government in any State sounds the death knell to democracy. We both are mutual watchdogs, so to say, no mutual admirers, much less constitutional cohorts," he said in the letter to the CJI.
2) Chelameswar wants full court discussion on govt interference: In the letter that he shot off to the CJI, Justice Chelameswar asked him to consider convening a full court to take up the issue of executive interference in the judiciary. "I am of the opinion that this matter is now ripe for the consideration of the Full Court on the judicial side, if this institution really is to be any more relevant in the scheme of the Constitution," said the letter.
ALSO READ: Justice Chelameswar seeks full court discussion on govt interference
3) Chelameswar slams Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari: The unprecedented letter questioned the probe initiated by Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari against District and Sessions Judge Krishna Bhat at the instance of Union Ministry of Law and Justice, despite his name being recommended for elevation twice by the Collegium. "Someone from Bangalore has already beaten us in the race to the bottom. The Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court is more than willing to do the Executive bidding, behind our back," Justice Chelameswar wrote in his six-page letter.
ALSO READ: SC judge red flags Centre's interference, asks CJI to convene full court
4) Chelameswar hits out at communication between Karnataka HC and executive: Further, while taking serious note of the communication between the Karnataka High Court Chief Justice and the executive, Chelameswar said that the role of the high court ceased with its recommendation. He said that any correspondence, clarificatory or otherwise, had to be between the executive and the Supreme Court.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court collegium recommends 11 names for permanent judges in 3 HCs
5) 'Executive move improper and contumacious': Chelameswar deemed as "improper" the government's move to ask the Karnataka High Court to re-evaluate the Supreme Court's recommendation in the matter of District and Sessions Judge Krishna Bhat. While referring to Bhat's case, he said, "To my mind, I could recollect no instance from the past, of the executive bypassing the Supreme Court, more particularly while its recommendations are pending, to look into the allegations already falsified and conclusively rejected by us. Asking the High Court to re-evaluate our recommendation in this matter has to be deemed improper and contumacious."
ALSO READ: Impeachment motion against Chief Justice: Dipak Misra controversy explained
6) 'So much for SC's independence and preeminence': While raising the issue of the judiciary's independence, Chelameswar said, "We, the judges of the Supreme Court of India, are being accused of ceding our independence and our institutional integrity to the Executive's incremental encroachment.
"The executive is always impatient, and brooks no disobedience even of the judiciary if it can. Attempts were always made to treat the Chief Justices as the Departmental Heads in the Secretariat," the letter said, adding, "So much for our 'independence and preeminence' as a distinct State organ."
Click here to read our coverage on the SC judges' press conference in January: Rules not being adhered to: Questions raised by 4 judges in letter to CJI
7) 'Inconvenient but able judges being bypassed': Justice Chelameswar referred to the "unhappy experience" where the Government was sitting on the files even after the Collegium had recommended names for appointment in the higher judiciary. "For some time, our unhappy experience has been that the government's accepting our recommendations is an exception and sitting on them is the norm. 'Inconvenient' but able judges or judges to be are being bypassed through this route," he alleged in his letter.
Click here for the Business Standard Special written by Sanjay Hegde and Pranjal Kishore on the January SC judges' matter: Why there is a need to check Chief Justice's power over the SC roster
8) 'In future, government would directly communicate with HCs on pending cases': Chelameswar's letter said such a judiciary may not be "far-off" when the executive would directly communicate with the High Court about the pending cases and ask what orders are to be passed.
9) Chelameswar cites precedence: Justice Chelameswar also referred to a past instance when the Supreme Court had taken serious note of a direct communication of the then law minister to the high courts on the issue of judges' transfer, which had finally led to the judgment in first judges case in 1981. Later, the Collegium had assumed power with regard to judges' appointment in the higher judiciary.
10) Karnataka case explained: Back in 2016, then Chief Justice of India T S Thakur had asked then High Court chief Justice S K Mukherjee to hold an enquiry against Bhat on allegations brought against him by a subordinate woman judicial officer. Bhat's name was later recommended after the probe had given him a clean chit.
In his six-page letter, Chelameswar, number two in the apex court hierarchy, raised the issue of judicial independence and wrote: "We, the judges of the Supreme Court of India, are being accused of ceding our independence and our institutional integrity to the Executive's incremental encroachment." Asking CJI Misra to take up the issue of the executive's interference in the judiciary by convening a full court on the judicial side, Justice Chelameswar said that such a step was necessary in order to ensure that the institution of the Supreme Court remained relevant under the scheme of the Constitution.
Further, taking serious note of the communication between the Karnataka High Court Chief Justice and the executive, Chelameswar said the role of the high court ceased with its recommendation. He said that any correspondence, clarificatory or otherwise, had to be between the executive and the Supreme Court.
In January, the four senior-most Supreme Court judges had held an unprecedented press conference and raised the issue of assignment of cases. The Supreme Court judges had met the media to complain that the administration of the country's top court was not in order. At a hurriedly called press conference at the residence of Justice Chelameswar, they had said it was with "no pleasure" that they had been compelled to make public what they were upset with. The other three judges involved were Justices Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph.
Here are the highlights of Justice J Chelameswar's letter to Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra:
1) 'Death knell for democracy': Any "bonhomie" between the judiciary and the government would sound the "death knell" for democracy, Chelameswar told the CJI in his letter. "Let us also not forget the bonhomie between the judiciary and the government in any State sounds the death knell to democracy. We both are mutual watchdogs, so to say, no mutual admirers, much less constitutional cohorts," he said in the letter to the CJI.
2) Chelameswar wants full court discussion on govt interference: In the letter that he shot off to the CJI, Justice Chelameswar asked him to consider convening a full court to take up the issue of executive interference in the judiciary. "I am of the opinion that this matter is now ripe for the consideration of the Full Court on the judicial side, if this institution really is to be any more relevant in the scheme of the Constitution," said the letter.
ALSO READ: Justice Chelameswar seeks full court discussion on govt interference
3) Chelameswar slams Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari: The unprecedented letter questioned the probe initiated by Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Dinesh Maheshwari against District and Sessions Judge Krishna Bhat at the instance of Union Ministry of Law and Justice, despite his name being recommended for elevation twice by the Collegium. "Someone from Bangalore has already beaten us in the race to the bottom. The Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court is more than willing to do the Executive bidding, behind our back," Justice Chelameswar wrote in his six-page letter.
ALSO READ: SC judge red flags Centre's interference, asks CJI to convene full court
4) Chelameswar hits out at communication between Karnataka HC and executive: Further, while taking serious note of the communication between the Karnataka High Court Chief Justice and the executive, Chelameswar said that the role of the high court ceased with its recommendation. He said that any correspondence, clarificatory or otherwise, had to be between the executive and the Supreme Court.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court collegium recommends 11 names for permanent judges in 3 HCs
5) 'Executive move improper and contumacious': Chelameswar deemed as "improper" the government's move to ask the Karnataka High Court to re-evaluate the Supreme Court's recommendation in the matter of District and Sessions Judge Krishna Bhat. While referring to Bhat's case, he said, "To my mind, I could recollect no instance from the past, of the executive bypassing the Supreme Court, more particularly while its recommendations are pending, to look into the allegations already falsified and conclusively rejected by us. Asking the High Court to re-evaluate our recommendation in this matter has to be deemed improper and contumacious."
ALSO READ: Impeachment motion against Chief Justice: Dipak Misra controversy explained
6) 'So much for SC's independence and preeminence': While raising the issue of the judiciary's independence, Chelameswar said, "We, the judges of the Supreme Court of India, are being accused of ceding our independence and our institutional integrity to the Executive's incremental encroachment.
"The executive is always impatient, and brooks no disobedience even of the judiciary if it can. Attempts were always made to treat the Chief Justices as the Departmental Heads in the Secretariat," the letter said, adding, "So much for our 'independence and preeminence' as a distinct State organ."
Click here to read our coverage on the SC judges' press conference in January: Rules not being adhered to: Questions raised by 4 judges in letter to CJI
7) 'Inconvenient but able judges being bypassed': Justice Chelameswar referred to the "unhappy experience" where the Government was sitting on the files even after the Collegium had recommended names for appointment in the higher judiciary. "For some time, our unhappy experience has been that the government's accepting our recommendations is an exception and sitting on them is the norm. 'Inconvenient' but able judges or judges to be are being bypassed through this route," he alleged in his letter.
Click here for the Business Standard Special written by Sanjay Hegde and Pranjal Kishore on the January SC judges' matter: Why there is a need to check Chief Justice's power over the SC roster
8) 'In future, government would directly communicate with HCs on pending cases': Chelameswar's letter said such a judiciary may not be "far-off" when the executive would directly communicate with the High Court about the pending cases and ask what orders are to be passed.
9) Chelameswar cites precedence: Justice Chelameswar also referred to a past instance when the Supreme Court had taken serious note of a direct communication of the then law minister to the high courts on the issue of judges' transfer, which had finally led to the judgment in first judges case in 1981. Later, the Collegium had assumed power with regard to judges' appointment in the higher judiciary.
10) Karnataka case explained: Back in 2016, then Chief Justice of India T S Thakur had asked then High Court chief Justice S K Mukherjee to hold an enquiry against Bhat on allegations brought against him by a subordinate woman judicial officer. Bhat's name was later recommended after the probe had given him a clean chit.
No comments:
Post a Comment