English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Proven guilty by the bar?

Published

on

Ram Jethmalani

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]I am convinced you have lost your mind, writes senior lawyer Ram Jethmalani to CS Karnan, sitting High Court justice

By Sujit Bhar

The Justice CS Karnan case has stirred the legal community like no other. It has not only made the bench jittery, starting from the lower judiciary to the topmost office of the country, but has also generated huge interest among advocates and even the general public. The idea is to wait and watch how the judiciary deals with one of its own; whether the law actually applies to all, equally.

This is a constitutional issue. Incidentally, it must be remembered that there is no overarching mechanism that oversees the actions of the bench at the top level, starting from the High Court and upwards. The mechanism to handle issues at this level is to be handled through an impeachment process that is complicated and time consuming. It was beyond the comprehension of the writers of the constitution that such an issue would grow out of a system that was formatted and put in place with huge powers of oversight over the rest.

While there have been others who have faced impeachment due to corruption, Justice Karnan’s is a unique case which it isn’t about corruption, but about indiscipline and insubordination.

A screenshot of Jethmalani's letter

A screenshot of Jethmalani’s letter

The recent outburst of senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, in an open letter to Justice Karnan (see picture), is a case in point. It is a letter that, under normal circumstances, would have been taken as an affront to the judiciary and would have called for censure from the bench. No reaction is, so far, available from the bench on this letter.

The letter in itself was totally uncalled for, because as Jethmalani himself has admitted, “I have never met you nor even heard about you…” but then he goes on to say: “I am sorry to tell you that I am convinced you have lost your mind. You behaviour is that of a lunatic and some day that may be the only defence available to you though with no bright chance of success.”

One would wonder what the result would be, if any lawyer, of whichever standing, or an ordinary citizen for that matter, had written such a letter to any other high court judge of the country. Would not contempt proceedings be brought against that lawyer?

Jethmalani also says: “…humbly pray for pardon for every stupid action you have so far indulged in.”

This has to be studied in three parts. First, the law-abiding citizen would like to see how the judiciary deals with one of its own, and how it provides even a judge a fair trial. Can a judge—or any citizen for that matter—be declared a law-breaker because he/she refused to appear for a contempt hearing? If so, then the law is being justly and equally embalmed.

Secondly, would not Justice Karnan be deemed innocent till proved guilty? If at this point nothing has been proved against him—certainly no crime—how was it possible for a senior lawyer to cast serious personal aspersions on a member of the bench? This is not to condone the actions of the judge in question (Justice Karnan), but to question the action of a lawyer, who is no more a civilian than any one of us, even if he is attached to the judicial system.

And third, if discipline is a matter imposed only on non-judicial civilians, then would the constitution condone that act? What is the mechanism of redress available to the ordinary citizen in the case of an emotional outburst following a judgement that he or she or his or her family fails to comprehend and/or feels has not been fair? Does the accused have access to redressal, other than approach a higher court, which involves cost? If not, should Jethmalani be so unique a human being that his letter can be overlooked?

The Justice Katju case

This brings to mind the call for contempt of Justice Markandey Katju. Not only was he a former judge of the Supreme Court, he is also the former Chairman, Press Council of India, both extremely authoritative positions. He has been known to be outspoken, a trait that got him in trouble.

In the Soumya rape and murder case—where the culprit Govindachamy assaulted and then raped the 23-year-old in the empty ladies coach of a moving train before allegedly pushing her off the train, killing her—the Supreme Court had refused to give capital punishment to Govindachamy. It upheld his life sentence instead, overturning the Kerala High Court’s death sentence of 2013.

The incident was almost as gruesome as the Delhi Nirbhaya case, though the assailant was just one, but the issue of his pushing Soumya off the train could not be proved. That was the primary reason why the Supreme Court stopped before capital punishment.

The judgement created heartbreak in Kerala and Justice Katju said in a Facebook entry that the apex court had “grievously erred” by not imposing death penalty. Katju said it was “regrettable” that the court has not read Section 300 carefully.

In October 2016, the apex court summoned Justice Katju and issued a contempt notice for criticizing the judge and not the judgement. To this, Justice Katju had said: “Mr (Justice) Gogoi don’t threaten me. Do what you want. I am not scared.”

The incident got serious when Justice Katju kept reminding the Judge (Gogoi) that he (Katju) was senior to him. At one point the bench called for security, saying: “Is there anyone to escort Justice Katju out of court?”

In January this year Justice Katju had to submit an unconditional apology to the court at which contempt proceedings were dropped.

If that was the case of a former Supreme Court Judge, casting personal insults on a sitting high court judge might be considered a serious case, especially when the judge in question is yet to be proven guilty of any crime other than contempt of court.

How does advocate Ram Jethmalani stand?[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

PM Modi urges people to read Tirukkural on Thiruvalluvar Day

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thiruvalluvar Day appealed to people to read the Tirukkural, calling it a reflection of the humane and harmonious ideals of Tamil philosopher-poet Thiruvalluvar.

Published

on

pm modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday urged people across the country to read the Tirukkural, highlighting its enduring relevance and the intellectual legacy of Tamil philosopher-poet Thiruvalluvar.

Marking Thiruvalluvar Day, which coincides with the Pongal celebrations every year, the prime minister paid tribute to the revered scholar, describing him as a symbol of harmony, compassion and Tamil cultural excellence.

In a message shared on social media platform X, Modi said Thiruvalluvar’s works and ideals continue to inspire countless people even today. He noted that the philosopher envisioned a society rooted in compassion and balance.

The prime minister encouraged citizens to engage with the Tirukkural, a classical Tamil text that deals with various aspects of human life, ethics and governance, calling it a window into the profound intellect of Thiruvalluvar.

Thiruvalluvar Day is observed annually to honour the philosopher-poet, whose literary contributions remain central to Tamil culture and thought.

Continue Reading

India News

BJP, Thackerays or Pawars: Maharashtra civic body poll results awaited today

Counting of votes for 29 municipal corporations in Maharashtra, including the key BMC and Pune civic bodies, begins today, with BJP, Thackerays and Pawars awaiting crucial results.

Published

on

The political balance in Maharashtra’s urban centres will become clearer today as votes are counted for elections to 29 municipal corporations across the state. The results are keenly awaited amid high-stakes contests involving the BJP, the Thackeray cousins and the reunited Pawar factions.

Polling was held for 2,869 seats across 893 wards, with 3.48 crore eligible voters deciding the fate of 15,931 candidates. Counting is scheduled to begin at 10 am.

Mumbai and Pune in sharp focus

All eyes are on Mumbai, where the contest for the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has drawn statewide attention. Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray joined hands after more than two decades in a bid to reclaim control of the country’s richest civic body.

The BMC, which has an annual budget of over Rs 74,400 crore, went to polls after a nine-year gap, following a four-year delay. A total of 1,700 candidates contested the 227 seats.

Exit polls suggest a strong performance by the BJP–Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde faction) alliance in Mumbai. An aggregate of multiple surveys projects the ruling alliance ahead, with the Shiv Sena (UBT) and allies trailing, while the Congress is expected to secure a limited number of seats. Exit polls have also indicated possible voting consolidation among Maratha and Muslim voters behind the Thackeray-led alliance, while women and young voters may tilt towards the BJP.

The last BMC election in 2017 saw the undivided Shiv Sena retain control of the civic body it had dominated for decades.

In Pune, the spotlight is on the unusual alliance between rival NCP factions led by Ajit Pawar and Sharad Pawar. Exit polls indicate the BJP could emerge as the largest party in the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC), with both NCP factions and the Shiv Sena also expected to secure a share of seats.

Statewide counting underway

Apart from Mumbai and Pune, counting will take place in several other key municipal corporations, including Thane, Navi Mumbai, Kalyan-Dombivli, Nagpur, Nashik, Pimpri-Chinchwad, Mira-Bhayandar, Vasai-Virar, Solapur, Kolhapur, Amravati, Akola, Jalgaon, Malegaon, Latur, Dhule, Jalna, Sangli-Miraj-Kupwad, Nanded-Waghala, Chandrapur, Parbhani, Panvel, Bhiwandi-Nizampur, Ulhasnagar, Ahilyanagar and Ichalkaranji.

With major parties treating these civic polls as a referendum on their urban appeal ahead of future state and national elections, today’s results are expected to shape Maharashtra’s political narrative in the months to come.

Continue Reading

India News

Supreme Court flags risk of lawlessness, pauses FIRs against ED officers in Bengal case

The Supreme Court paused FIRs against ED officers in the Bengal I-PAC raid case, warning that obstruction of central probes could lead to lawlessness and seeking responses from the Centre and state.

Published

on

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday delivered a sharp rebuke to the Mamata Banerjee-led West Bengal government, pausing FIRs lodged against officers of the Enforcement Directorate over searches linked to political consultancy I-PAC. The court said the case raises serious questions about interference in investigations and warned that failure to address them could lead to “lawlessness”.

A bench of Justice Prashant Mishra and Justice Vipul Pancholi sought replies from the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Department of Personnel and Training, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and the Trinamool Congress government on the ED’s plea. The central agency has also sought the suspension of Bengal Director General of Police Rajeev Kumar and Kolkata Police Commissioner Manoj Kumar Verma, and a probe by the CBI. The matter will be heard next on February 3.

The ruling follows a standoff between the ED and the Bengal government after the agency conducted searches at premises linked to I-PAC, which manages election campaigns for the Trinamool Congress, in connection with a corruption case.

Court questions obstruction of central probes

Recording its prima facie view, the Supreme Court said the petition raised a “serious issue” concerning investigations by central agencies and possible obstruction by state authorities.

“There are larger questions which emerge and if not answered shall lead to lawlessness. If central agencies are working bona fide to probe a serious offence, a question arises: Can they be obstructed by party activities?” the bench observed.

Earlier in the day, the court also expressed disturbance over scenes of chaos in the Calcutta High Court during a hearing related to the same dispute.

ED alleges interference, seeks action against top cops

The Enforcement Directorate accused the West Bengal administration of interfering with its searches and investigation. Appearing for the agency, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta alleged that evidence was removed from the residence of an I-PAC co-founder and argued that such actions could encourage state police officers to aid and abet obstruction. He sought suspension of senior police officials.

Describing the disruption in the Calcutta High Court on January 9, Mehta called it “mobocracy”, saying a group of lawyers unconnected to the case disrupted proceedings, forcing an adjournment. The bench asked whether the high court had been turned into a protest site, to which Mehta responded that messages had circulated calling lawyers to gather at a specific time.

Banerjee’s counsel defends move, cites election confidentiality

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mamata Banerjee, questioned the timing of the ED’s presence in Bengal ahead of Assembly elections. He said the last development in the coal scam case dated back to February 2024 and argued that I-PAC handled election-related work under a formal contract with the Trinamool Congress.

According to Sibal, election data stored at the premises was confidential and critical to campaign strategy. He said the party leadership had a right to protect such information.

Representing the Bengal government and the DGP, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi referred to the January 9 disruption but argued it could not justify parallel proceedings in different courts. The bench responded that emotions “cannot go out of hand repeatedly”.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com