Senior judges' action "wholly" condemnable; former SC Judge

Image
Press Trust of India Bengaluru
Last Updated : Jan 13 2018 | 7:05 PM IST
Former Supreme Court judge N Santosh Hegde today "wholly" condemned the action of four senior judges in going public over internal matters of the judiciary, saying it affected the reputation of the institution and may amount to contempt of court.
Questioning their action, he said internalmatters of the judiciary should not have been brought to thepublic for discussion, because neither the public, nor the government or the executive can give any relief to them.
"I wholly condemn the press meet yesterday held by the four judges of the Supreme Court.
"My complaint is these thingsshould not have been publicly discussed, consequent to whichthe reputation of the judiciary has been affected," he told PTI.
In an unprecedented move in the country's judicial history, Justices J Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph had held a press conference yesterday and mounted a virtual revolt against Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, questioning him on the 'selective' allocation of cases and certain judicial orders passed by him.
Hegde, a former Lokayukta of Karnataka, said their action would not benefit anybody other than drawing public attention.
He said institutions like the judiciary survive on the confidence of the people.
"Once the confidence of the people is lost, the institution will be useless," he said.
Agreeing that the judges' intention was to'bring the muck out of the system, he disapproved of their approach as it would set a new precedent where judges of High Courts and the Supreme Court would start bringing theirdifferences into the public domain.
On whether their action was liable for impeachment,Hegde said he does not want to goto that extent, though he felt it can be possible, giventhe fact that a Calcutta High Court judge was impeached forcontempt of court.
He however, felt that their action may amount to contempt of court.
"Yes, it may amount to contempt of court but I amnot talking about that...I don't want to take the issue toanother direction. I am only questioning the action of the four judges who came out saying that the Chief Justice is being giving cases according to his whims and fancies.
"Yes, that is the jurisdiction given to him. And why not? That bench before which the case is posted does not have only person. There are two other judges there."
"That means you are suspecting the three judges. Let us not denigrate the institution," said Hegde.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

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

More From This Section

First Published: Jan 13 2018 | 7:05 PM IST

Next Story