SC slams trend of casting doubt on Telangana HC judges in cases involving politicians
A bench of Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, Justice K. Vinod Chandran, and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar was hearing a case where it had earlier issued notice to litigant Peddi Raju and his counsel, asking why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them for allegedly making scurrilous allegations against Telangana High Court judge Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya.
The allegations were made in a petition seeking transfer of a case, in which Telangana Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy had secured relief away from the Telangana High Court.
The High Court had quashed certain criminal charges against Reddy under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The top court directed Raju and his lawyers to tender an apology before Justice Bhattacharya, leaving it to her discretion to accept or reject it.
Referring to a recent precedent, the bench noted, 'Recently, a three-judge bench of this Court, to which two of us were party, held that wisdom lies in forgiving rather than punishing in such cases, and accepted the lawyer's apology.'
In its order, the Supreme Court observed that such remarks in a petition constitute contempt, adding, 'We have noticed that nowadays it has become a trend among lawyers to critique judges of High Courts and trial courts.
It has become a trend that when a matter involves a political figure, there is an assumption that there cannot be justice in the High Court.'
The bench stressed that High Court judges, as constitutional authorities, enjoy the same respect and immunity as Supreme Court judges.
'Under the constitutional scheme, they have the same respect as the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court does not have any administrative control over the High Court or its judges. When such allegations are made against High Court judges, it is the duty of this Court to protect them,' the CJI-led Bench remarked.
UNI SNG SS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
3 minutes ago
- Hans India
Lok Sabha initiates impeachment process against Justice Yashwant Varma
In a rare and constitutionally significant move, the Lok Sabha on Tuesday formally read out the impeachment motion against Allahabad High Court Judge Justice Yashwant Varma, marking the beginning of proceedings under Articles 124 (4) and 217 and 218 of the Constitution for his potential removal from office. Speaker On Birla said he had received a motion on July 31 backed by Ravi Shankar Prasad and a total of 146 members from the Lok Sabha and 63 from the Rajya Sabha, following explosive revelations earlier this year when bundles of charred currency were discovered at Justice Varma's government-allotted residence in Delhi during a fire incident in March. Though the judge was not present at the time the fire occurred at his residence, a three-member in-house judicial inquiry later concluded that he exercised 'secret or active control' over the stash, prompting the Chief Justice of India to recommend his removal. The impeachment motion was read out in the House by Speaker Om Birla, who also announced the formation of a statutory committee to investigate the charges. As per the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 and related rules, the panel will include a sitting Supreme Court judge, a Chief Justice from a High Court, and a distinguished jurist. He said, 'I have found substance as per the rules in the motion and have admitted it for discussion. I have also constituted a three-member committee to investigate the matter, which includes: Justice Arvind Kumar, Supreme Court; Justice Manindar Mohan Shrivastava, Chief Justice of Madras High Court; and Mr V.V. Acharya, senior high court, Karnatka High Court. The committee will soon give its report, and till then the motion will remain pending.' Justice Varma had challenged the inquiry's findings in the Supreme Court, arguing procedural unfairness and constitutional overreach. However, the apex court dismissed his plea last week, stating that the process was 'transparent and constitutional', and criticised his decision to participate in the inquiry while later questioning its legitimacy. If the committee finds merit in the allegations, the motion will require a special majority in both Houses -- a two-thirds vote of members present and voting, and a majority of the total membership -- before being sent to the President for final approval. This marks only the third time in independent India's history that impeachment proceedings have been initiated against a sitting judge, underscoring the gravity of the charges and the institutional resolve to uphold judicial integrity.
Mint
3 minutes ago
- Mint
Cash-at-home row: Lok Sabha forms 3-member panel to probe allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma
Cash-at-home row: Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on Tuesday announced on Tuesday that a three-member panel will probe allegations against High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma in the cash-at-home row. Supreme Court judge Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, and Senior Advocate, Karnataka High Court BV Acharya will investigate the charges against Justice Varma. The committee will submit its report as early as possible. The proposal will remain pending till the receipt of the report of the inquiry committee, Birla said. Before announcing the three-member panel, Speaker Om Birla accepted the motion signed by 146 MPs to impeach Justice Yashwant Verma. In July, the MPs submitted a notice to the Lok Sabha Speaker requesting Justice Varma's removal under Articles 124, 217, and 218 of the Constitution. The issue pertains to the discovery of a huge pile of currency notes at an outhouse of Justice Varma's official residence, then a judge of the Delhi High Court, during a fire-fighting operation on 14 March. A video showed bundles of cash burning in the fire. The recovery led to a huge public controversy. The then CJI Sanjiv Khanna had constituted an in-house inquiry committee of three judges- Justice Sheel Nagu (then Chief Justice of Punjab & Haryana High Court), Justice GS Sandhawalia (then Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court), and Justice Anu Sivaraman (Judge, Karnataka High Court). The Supreme Court on Thursday, 7 August, dismissed a writ petition filed by Allahabad High Court Justice Yashwant Varma regarding the cash-at-home scandal. Justice Varma's plea challenged the in-house inquiry report, which indicted him in the case-at-home scandal, and the recommendation made by former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna to impeach him over the recovery of a large sum of unaccounted cash at his official residence in Delhi.
Hindustan Times
3 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Haryana rights panel seeks report on 27 govt schools in Hisar in unsafe buildings
The Haryana Human Rights Commission on Tuesday took suo motu cognizance of 27 government schools functioning in unsafe buildings in Hisar district and directed officials to make safe arrangements for students within eight weeks. The commission said after seven students were killed and 28 injured when a building collapsed in neighbouring Rajasthan recently, the state government should take proactive measures to ensure no such tragedy occurs in Haryana. (PTI file) 'Multiple government schools continue to function in buildings that have been officially declared condemned due to their unsafe structural condition. Children, some as young as six years old, are being exposed daily to unsafe structures, many of which include broken staircases, damaged water tanks, sealed toilets and unstable walls and roofs,' the three-member commission, led by justice Lalit Batra (retd), said. The panel said that the ground situation in Hisar district reveals not merely administrative negligence but threat to the safety, dignity and psychological well-being of schoolchildren. It observed that the absence of safety protocols amounts to a direct and deliberate compromise with the lives of the students. 'Such conditions not only violate the physical safety of the students but also result in mental trauma, fear, and academic disruption undermining their right to education in a safe environment,' said justice Batra, adding 'During monsoon, there is a risk of exposure to snakes and other threats due to the lack of proper infrastructure. In severe instances, entire school buildings, including toilets, staircases and kitchens, have been rendered unusable.' The panel said it is the constitutional duty of the state government and the department of education to ensure the safety of students. It said that the failure to provide basic infrastructure, including structurally safe buildings, toilets, water and classrooms, particularly after buildings have been officially declared unsafe, constitutes criminal abdication of duty and gross violation of child safety norms under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009. The commission said after seven students were killed and 28 injured when a building collapsed in neighbouring Rajasthan recently, the state government should take proactive measures to ensure no such tragedy occurs in Haryana. It directed the principal secretary, school education, director general of secondary education, Hisar deputy commissioner and additional deputy commissioner along with the district education officer to submit a report about the status of each condemned building and safe arrangements for students within eight weeks. The panel also sought a timeline for reconstruction and budget allocation, number of students impacted, alternate accommodation provided or proposed and explain the delay in the reconstruction/relocation despite condemnation of buildings.
