Their meeting came hours after the CJI reached out to them at the apex court lounge and held parleys with them over tea, before starting the day's proceedings in the apex court.
It is learnt that Justices J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph had a meeting but nothing concrete has emerged. The meeting in the evening took place at the residence of one of these judges.
Sources said the judges are likely to meet the CJI tomorrow morning as usual and probably some more deliberations are on the cards as hectic parleys are on to restore normalcy in the top court's functioning.
"As of now, nothing concrete has emerged," sources close to the four judges said.
Some of the judges, lower in the apex court hierarchy, are in favour of some rapprochement at the earliest on the grounds that the reputation of the judiciary is at stake.
The four judges had in an unprecedented press conference on January 12 raised a litany of problems, including the assigning of cases in the apex court, and said there were certain issues afflicting the country's highest court.
Others said even the matter relating to the death of special judge B H Loya should not have been heard in such a surcharged atmosphere.
Senior advocate and SCBA president Vikas Singh had wondered why some activist lawyers were making a fuss about assignment of sensitive cases in the apex court to judges who are ranked lower in seniority.
Speaking to PTI, Singh in his personal capacity, condemned the reported remarks of another senior advocate who supported the four judges on the allocation of PILs to the five senior most judges of the apex court.
Amidst the ongoing crisis, a body comprising activists from various fields today said it has handed over a complaint against CJI to the five senior most Supreme Court judges over alleged misconduct in connection with the medical college bribery case.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, the convenor of Campaign for Judical Accountability and Reforms (CJAR), held a press conference and repeated all the allegations it had raised in its PIL in the case that was dismissed by the Supreme Court with an exemplary cost of Rs 25 lakh.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
