&w=3840&q=100)
CJI not a mere post office, must uphold judicial transparency: SC
"We have no hesitation to say that the CJI is not a mere post office between the committee and the President/the Prime Minister that the report is to be forwarded without any remarks/recommendation. The CJI is clearly an important person, if not the most, in the larger scheme of maintaining institutional interest and credibility to ascertain whether a Judge has indulged in misconduct," the top court said.
The observations came while deciding the plea of Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma, against whom an SC-appointed expert panel filed a damning report over the discovery of burnt wads of cash from his official residence during his judgeship in Delhi.
"As per the procedure, after receiving a complaint against a judge or a report from the Chief Justice of the High Court of which he is a Judge, the CJI has to apply his mind to the nature of complaint/report together with supporting materials, if any," a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih said.
Observing procedure was scrupulously followed, the top court dismissed Varma's plea seeking invalidation of the in-house inquiry report finding him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery row.
In its judgement, the apex court observed if the CJI believes the matter requires a deeper probe, he is required to constitute a committee for an in-house inquiry.
"The report of inquiry may, or may not, find the allegations against the Judge to be serious, so as to call for any measure. However, if it does, the CJI is under an obligation to forward the report to the President and the Prime Minister. We see no justification to hold that in so forwarding, the CJI may not give his own views," the bench said.
It went on, "The CJI bears a significant moral responsibility as the foremost judicial officer to ensure that the judiciary of the country functions in a transparent, efficient and constitutionally appropriate manner.
Advising judges to be cautious and exercise discretion in judicial conduct, the top court said judicial officers in every rank, and more specifically, judges in the higher echelons of the judiciary "owe huge obligation" to the people of the country.
"No judge, either of the Supreme Court or the High Courts, being above the law, acting in the discharge of his judicial or administrative/non-judicial or official duties in a manner attracting a possible complaint of not abiding by the restatement of values of judicial life (widely regarded now as the Code of Conduct for Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts) has to be shunned." While frivolous complaints of disgruntled litigants, lawyers among others couldn't be avoided, the top court said, the path of probity also could never be abandoned by a judge.
"Any thought of there being absence of disciplinary measure other than removal by impeachment (which has never fructified over the years despite occasions calling for it) and therefore escaping unscathed despite committing a misbehaviour or indulging in bad conduct/misconduct, is what is normal, should be eschewed," it added.
The apex court said with the advancement in science and technology and all other spheres of work, it was quite possible to bring to the CJI's notice how a particular judge might have conducted themselves inappropriately, attracting strict action.
"Withdrawal of judicial work from a judge is an extreme measure that the procedure expressly permits. There are other measures too, which could be explored if judges are found to deviate from the Code of Conduct. The judges should, therefore, act cautiously and exercise their discretion wisely, to evade creation of a situation where initiating action becomes imperative," the verdict opined.
The bench further pointed out that the judiciary in India was characterised by judicial independence, but such independence signified flexibility of judicial thought and the freedom to adjudicate without external and internal pressure and not unfettered liberty to act as one might wish.
"Just as judicial independence is fundamental, so too is judicial accountability, compromising one compromises the other," the verdict added.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
15 minutes ago
- Time of India
CJI Gavai arrives in Itanagar on 2-day visit
1 2 3 4 Itanagar: Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai arrived in Itanagar on a two-day visit to Arunachal Pradesh on Saturday, reports Joken Ete. The CJI was accorded a ceremonial guard of honour by the Arunachal Pradesh Police at the Raj Bhavan. CM Pema Khandu , on behalf of the people of the state, extended a warm welcome to the CJI, presenting him a traditional khada, as a mark of respect and goodwill. Commissioner to governor Pawan Kumar Sian received the CJI on behalf of the governor, who is currently on an official tour. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Raksha Bandhan wishes , messages and quotes !
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
political line newsletter can I change my mind
Who can give consent to sex, change their faith, shift locations, marry as they please? Paternalistic laws try to regulate all this, and create new conflicts. Two Catholic nuns were arrested by the Chhattisgarh police on charges of human trafficking and forced conversion, and later released from jail. Those who were allegedly trafficked and forcibly converted were legally adults, but the state thinks they cannot change their minds at will, and they may be forced to do things. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is examining the question of when a girl can be considered able to give consent for sex. The Centre thinks that under no circumstances can a girl be considered as consenting to sex if she is below 18 years, even if her partner is of her age or younger, when it is a boy. One wonders how the law would understand sexual relations between two girls below 18 years — both are considered to be victims of crime as it stands today. 'Age of consent' is a decades-old question in India. Most liberal societies have rules that specify the age at which a person can give consent to sex, marry, and be prosecuted for a crime. The underlying premise is that when someone is below that age, they are not mentally equipped to make an autonomous decision. Sometimes these protections are not linked to age alone, but to whole social groups. For instance, tribespeople cannot sell their lands to non-tribals in India without state-monitored conditions. For instance, see this. There are also laws that seek to protect an Indian from leaving the borders of the country into exploitative or dangerous situations outside the jurisdiction of the Indian state. It is entirely a reasonable and legitimate concern that children and vulnerable people should be protected from dangerous ideas and mala fide actions of others. In the United States, there is an ongoing campaign against exposing kids to sexual content and gender identity questions during early school years. But what is the right way of doing this and how to avoid oppressive control over individual choices? For instance, a proposal to raise the legal age of marriage for women to 21 from the current 18 is under consideration in India. People who make a choice of changing their faith or marrying as they please do not have it easy at times — the state thinks that they may be doing it due to allurement, under duress, or deception of some sort. In order to protect them from such traps, we have anti-conversion laws, which, incidentally, have a long history that goes back much before the BJP's rise to power. In recent years, several BJP-ruled States have made laws that seek to protect women from so-called 'love jihad'. The presumption is that people are incapable of autonomous decisions. But people change their mind all the time. Some people change their minds and begin to support a different political party than they previously did. In all cases of change of mind, some external stimulation is at play, there is an allurement — the person who is being enticed to buy a KFC meal, to apply for a work visa in Australia, to switch political allegiance, and to convert to a different faith, to marry someone — all are being lured by advertisement, propaganda, or maybe just pure love. Between 2011 and 2023, 16 lakh people surrendered their Indian passports and acquired the citizenship and passport of another country. The change of mind with the least material consequence is changing one's faith — because the issues at stake when one changes faith come into play only when one is dead, and pass over to their afterlife. If a Hindu becomes a Christian, what is promised to them, eternal life, will be delivered only after they are dead. All other cases of change of mind have immediate material consequences — when an Indian goes to America, he stops paying taxes in India, for one. Staying on that thought, just to avoid paying taxes in India, thousands of people are legally residents of Dubai, a tax haven. But the law and law enforcement are harsher on someone who changes their faith or propagates it than on someone who lives in Dubai to avoid paying taxes in India or someone who consciously falls for the allurement of a foreign country and decides to formally abandon their Indian citizenship. To shield people from dangerous ideas, last week, the Jammu and Kashmir Home Department forfeited 25 books, many by prominent writers such as A.G. Noorani, Sumantra Bose, Arundhati Roy, and Ayesha Jalal. The worry is that they are 'propagating false narrative and secessionism'. The idea that people should be protected from dangerous ideas itself becomes a dangerous idea. Though these laws that deal with the mind are difficult to enforce with any semblance of objectivity, Indian courts are trying to be a step ahead of them. The Bombay High Court on July 25 dismissed a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the CPI challenging the Mumbai police's decision to deny permission for a protest at Azad Maidan against the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The court observed that Indian political organisations should prioritise domestic issues over international conflicts. The Supreme Court of India recently wondered whether Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi was a 'true Indian'. Federalism Tract: Notes on Indian Diversity Trump revives an American delimitation debate U.S. President Donald Trump has revived a proposal that he could not implement during this first presidency — which is to count the citizens separately in a decadal census, and link political representation to the distribution of citizens as opposed to all residents. Census, in the U.S. and India, counts all residents, and there is no separate classification of citizens. Apportionment of representation and revenue sharing is based on the distribution of residents across the country, though only citizens can vote. During his first presidency, Mr. Trump ordered the inclusion of a question on responder's citizenship in the 2020 Census. The Supreme Court of the U.S. stalled the move. (The decadal census was carried out, though it was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic.) 'I have instructed our Department of Commerce to immediately begin work on a new and highly accurate CENSUS based on modern day facts and figures and, importantly, using the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024. People who are in our Country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS,' he had posted on August 7. This will lead to a legal battle ahead of the 2030 Census as it happened ahead of the 2020 Census. The geographical configuration of constituencies can have a significant impact on electoral outcome. Republican Governor of Texas Gregg Abbot is pushing for an out of turn redistricting of House of Representatives seats in the State, hoping to counter a possible countrywide surge of Democrats in next year's midterm elections. Like in India, redistricting is supposed to be done after each decadal census. But unlike India, it can be done out of turn also in the U.S. The proposed congressional map is aimed at flipping five U.S. House seats currently held by Democrats. Karnataka and Tamil Nadu choose two-language policy The Commission for State Education Policy, headed by educationist Professor Sukhadeo Thorat, has recommended Kannada/mother tongue as the medium of instruction in primary education and a two-language policy in place of the current three-language policy in Karnataka, among its key recommendations. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin released the Tamil Nadu State Education Policy - School Education and reiterated the State's two-language policy of teaching only Tamil and English.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
SC stays operation of UP govt's Banke Bihari temple ordinance, forms panel led by ex-HC judge
The Supreme Court has stayed the operation of Uttar Pradesh government's Banke Bihari temple trust ordinance, which rests administrative control of the shrine with the state, till the high court decides its validity. The bench, however, clarified that its interim direction will not preclude the state from ratification of the Ordinance in the state assembly.(HT Photo) A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi refused to entertain the challenges made to the Uttar Pradesh Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Temple Trust Ordinance, 2025, and said the affected parties can approach the high court. "At this stage, we are reminded of the fact that the petitioners' challenge to the Ordinance will doubtlessly take some time in proper adjudication. We, therefore, deem it fit to stay operation of the Ordinance's provisions in the interregnum, only to the extent they grant the state powers to constitute a Trust for managing the temple's affairs," the bench directed. The top court said consequently, the constitution of the Shree Bankey Bihar Ji Temple Trust, as defined in Section 3 of the Ordinance and its composition, as contained in Section 5, shall be kept in abeyance till the question of validity of the Ordinance (or any Act in relation thereto subsequently passed by the state legislature), is finally resolved by the high court. The bench, however, clarified that its interim direction will not preclude the state from ratification of the Ordinance in the state assembly, but such an exercise will be subject to the outcome of the proceedings for which the affected persons and the petitioners have been relegated to the high court. The top court in its detailed order uploaded on Saturday also constituted a 12-member high-powered committee headed by retired Allahabad High Court judge Ashok Kumar to look after the day-to-day affairs of the iconic temple. It said, "We are equally mindful that the sum of our directions shall effectively leave the management of the subject temple in limbo yet again, since the ad-hoc arrangement of temple management has been wholly ineffective and inefficient in discharging its duties over the years. "We are pained to observe that the previous administerial deadlock(s) and in-fighting have only worsened the problems plaguing the temple, causing much distress to the pilgrims – who are left without any amenities or redress." The bench said the material on record indicates that despite the substantial donations received by the temple running into hundreds of crores, no tangible steps appear to have been taken by the successive managements for providing essential facilities to the scores of devotees visiting the temple, and the Goswami Shebaits remain divided into factions and continue to litigate before the civil courts, further contributing to administrative inaction. "We are, therefore, satisfied that a high-powered managing committee headed by an impartial person with considerable experience and ability is required to be constituted to run the day-to-day affairs of the temple, apart from undertaking some of the initiatives, which we are illustratively mentioning in the latter part of this order. "There is no gainsaying that the sanctity of safe religious pilgrimage shall never be unjustly denied to all the citizens of this country," the top court said. It also lauded the state government for taking a "fair stand" over the constitution of the committee for the management of the affairs of the temple, and said the panel may deal with a variety of issues for the proper functioning of the temple, including the provision of essential amenities for the devotees. The top court also modified its May 15 order, which gave the go-ahead to the state's scheme to develop the Shri Banke Bihari Temple Corridor at Vrindavan in Mathura, and allowed the government to use temple fund to acquire five acres of land for developing it as a holding area for the devotees. "It seems to us that the order passed by a coordinate bench requires certain modifications/clarifications. That order purportedly directs for the redevelopment of the temple's vicinity through the employment of temple funds. "However, we find that such directions suffer from a foundational procedural infirmity -- the principal affected parties, including the Shebait Goswamis, who have been administering the temple, were not heard prior to the passing of the said order," it said. The bench further said to allow substantive directions on a matter of such significance to be issued in collateral proceedings, especially in absentia of the necessary stakeholders, may not be in conformity with procedural fairness and judicial best-practices. "That apart, we note that the high court, vide its judgment dated November 8, 2023, had expressly declined the state's prayer to utilise temple funds for land acquisition as part of the proposed redevelopment plan. "That judgment has attained finality, having never been assailed by the state in any appropriate appellate proceedings. In these circumstances, this court could not have, in exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction, effectively set aside the high court's judgment without any formal appeal or challenge being placed before it," the top court said. While directing for modification of the May 15 order, the bench ordered for restoring the legal position to status quo ante.
