The unprecedented press conference by four of the distinguished judges of our highest citadel of justice- our Hon'ble Supreme Court - seems to have belittled the said assertion.
Having gone through the detailed coverage in Times of India dated 13th of January, my observations are as follows:
a) Any case which gets referred to and then admitted in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has a significance over and above all the cases under adjudication in any court of our country, including our Hon'ble High Courts. Thus, the opinion that certain cases referred to and admitted in the Hon'ble Supreme Court could be of far reaching consequences' for the Nation relative to other cases under adjudication in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, can at best be a matter of perception, at least where the interest of our media in such cases is concerned,
b) That the collegium system of appointment of judges to the Hon'ble Supreme Court is flawed because of which some of its Hon'ble Judges, are not competent enough to handle cases which are deemed 'politically sensitive', can be debated endlessly. The final trigger for the stunning press conference by the four of the senior most judges came at 10.15 am on 12th of January, when the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India - Dipak Misra, bluntly turned down their last minute request to shift a 'politically sensitive' case from a particular bench. The Hon'ble CJI made it clear that he would not break the tradition, backed by a recent five-judge bench decision giving him the sole discretion to assign cases to benches of his choice. The Hon'ble CJI's decision was backed by the November 2017 verdict saying that CJI was 'master of the roster' and was free too sign cases to any bench,
c) A letter written earlier by the four judges to the Hon'ble CJI also mentioned that "The convention of recognising the privilege of the CJI to form roster and assign cases to different members/benches of the Supreme court is a convention devised for disciplined and efficient transaction of business of the court, but not a recognition of any superior authority, legal or factual, of the CJI over his colleagues. It is too well settled in the jurisprudence of this country that the CJI is only first among equals - nothing more and nothing less." The Hon'ble CJI's office responded by saying "if these senior most judges were equal to the so called junior judges in the Court, then what is the grievance against a case getting listed before judge X or judge Y?"
d) Now, if the intention of any of these four distinguished judges were to protect the interests of the quality of justice being delivered by our highest citadel of justice, then at least one of them should have resigned as judge, and as a practicing advocate appealed against the November 2017 decision of the five-judge bench, which gave the Hon'ble CJI absolute authority in assigning cases to respective benches of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Or, at the very least even without stepping down, should have informally evolved consensus within the twenty -five of their colleagues in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, with regard to the appropriate procedures to be adopted by the Hon'ble CJI while assigning cases. This would have been very difficult for the Hon'ble CJI to ignore,
e) The perception one gets from the sequence of events as highlighted in Times of India dated 13th of January, is that these four distinguished judges have implicitly attacked the collegium system of appointment of judges, which is indeed ironic, considering that they themselves are the beneficiaries of the said collegium system. Why can't they be explicit and evolve a consensus within the legal fraternity about it? Why just go to the media to air their grievances thereby shocking "We the People of India" ?
f) Finally, I am compelled to agree with the observations of Justice (Retired) R.S. Sodhi, who has been quoted in the said Times Of India, "All the four judges should be impeached, they have no business to sit here and deliver verdicts anymore. This trade unionism is wrong...They are only four, there are twenty three others. Four get together and show Chief Justice in a poor light. It is immature and childish behaviour. We have dissenting views on so many things. But we do not go around washing our dirty linen in public...judicial impropriety.. The damage can't be mended easily."
Hope and pray that this ill-conceived press conference was just another aberration, in the otherwise much cherished history and track record of our judicial system.
Yes, with changing times, our judicial system may have lots more to be desired, and those much desired changes come about in a dignified manner, which only reinforces the faith and confidence of "We the People of India". Amen
