We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

Four chairs do not a bench make

7 7 63

Whether the “unprecedented”, even un-repeatable incidence of four senior SC judges gave a Press Conference came as a volcano that was to erupt, or had backstage manoeuvres that brought about the incident is immaterial on a certain count. Others to be discussed later.

What happened was, that justices in seniority 2-5 gave a statement that the CJI was handing over cases of national importance to much junior judges, even alleging their affiliations to the Centre, without declaring their own (elementary, Watson). Another statement, of dubious value being that 20 years hence, they should be held responsible for betraying the country. In a press exposure so guarded, and considering the seniority of the stature of their Lordships, how was the exact number “20 years” arrived at. Judicial language would have been aptly worded as “posterity”.

However, the concept of having been “culpable” as a judge is not to question his best judgemental understanding, unless it is proved that there were corrupt alliances that adulterated his judgement, and these apply to his own personal conduct.

A judge in SC may hold a lower judgement wrong, but that does not throw the lower judge out of job, or amount to an irregularity.
The press conference was held in the second in seniority Lordship to the CJI.

The brunt of the message was aimed at the CJI condemning him of partisan allotment of key cases to junior judges. The bearings were that a letter on a similar theme was written to the CJI for rectification, but a judgement passed by the four chairs was contrary to what was transmitted to the CJI.

A minor flaw here, and at the Constitutional level, as to four judges, not........

© The Times of India