A Gavel In The Voting Ring

A portrait of Justice Hans Raj Khanna hangs in Court No. 2 of the Supreme Court바카라�the same that Justice Jasti Chelameswar now occupies. In 1976, at the height of Emergency imposed by the then prime minister Indira Gandhi, the legendary Justice Khanna was the sole dissenting voice on a five-­member bench as he went against her in a case involving civil liberties. 바카라�What is at stake is the rule of law,바카라� he had observed. 바카라�The question is whether the law speaking through the authority of the court shall be absolutely silenced and rendered mute.바카라� This is believed to have cost him his promotion to Court No. 1, that of the Chief Justice of India.

Forty-two years later, Justice Chelameswar, flanked by three other seniormost judges Justices Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph바카라�occupying courts 3, 4 and 5 respectiv­ely바카라�pointed out that 바카라�things are not in order바카라� in the top court and that democracy is in danger. He claimed that the four of them didn바카라�t want wise men to say, 20 years from now, they had 바카라�sold their souls and didn바카라�t do the right thing by our Constitution.바카라� Highly critical of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, they said they had failed to persuade him to take 바카라�remedial measures바카라� on issues affecting the institution.

While it is difficult to speculate on the denouement of the unprecedented move by the four Supreme Court judges, the political landscape of Lutyens바카라� Delhi is abuzz with conspiracy theories. Were the judges instigated by elements perceived to be anti-government, including a prominent journalist present at the press conference held at Justice Chelameswar바카라�s sprawling 4, Tughlaq Road bungalow? The presence of senior lawyer Indira Jaising, who served as additional solicitor general during UPA regime, also raised eyebrows.

The timing of the press conference itself was questioned since it was the same day, on January 12, that the PIL demanding an inquiry into Justice B.H. Loya바카라�s death was to be heard in the court of Justice Arun Mishra, 10th in the pecking order of 25 judges. The four concerned judges had raised questions about what they termed the 바카라�selective바카라� allocation of cases by the Chief Justice. They said their grievance about allocation included the Justice Loya case, which incidentally was filed by Tehseen Poonawalla, who describes himself as a 바카라�political trendwatcher바카라� and regularly appears on TV debates to defend the Congress viewpoint. He is also Robert Vadra바카라�s brother-in-law.

When he died in 2014, Justice Loya was presiding over the Sohrabuddin Sheikh extra-judicial killing case in which BJP president Amit Shah was an accused. Seizing the opportunity created by the judges바카라� unprecedented press conference, newly anointed Congress president Rahul Gandhi reiterated there is a 바카라�threat to democracy바카라� in India and demanded a Supreme Court-monitored investigation into Justice Loya바카라�s death. Rahul had a long meeting with the lawyers in his party, including Kapil Sibal, P. Chidambaram and Manish Tewari, before he raised the issue.

바카라�In such a backdrop, and what in legal terms can be viewed as circumstantial evidence, how can anyone have any doubt that the entire drama is not politically motivated?바카라� asks a senior BJP leader. 바카라�There is no need for us to react. The people behind the theatrics are exposing themselves. It is a desperate attempt by certain people to try and show the Modi government in a bad light.바카라�

While the government has decided to take the 바카라�no comment바카라� and 바카라�no interference바카라� stand, party spokesperson Sambit Patra accuses the Congress of unnecessarily politicising the issue. 바카라�It바카라�s an internal matter of the Supreme Court,바카라� Patra tells Outlook. 바카라�The Congress is looking for opportunities where it should not. The judiciary cannot be dragged into politics, and issues pending in the court should not be discussed in public. The Congress should not indulge in politics over such a sensitive matter.바카라�

It was at a meeting with law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and minister of state P.P. Chaudhary, soon after the judges바카라� press conference, that the decision to stay out of the issue at the government level was taken by Prime ­Minster Narendra Modi. They made it clear that the government will not intervene and that the judiciary is independent, capable of resolving the issue itself.

바카라�If the government tries to resolve the problem, it will be seen as interference in the judiciary,바카라� says a senior government functionary, who did not wish to be named. 바카라�There is no institutional framework whereby the government can come in. The attorney general (K.K. Venugopal) is the government representative and he is on top of the situation.바카라� According to sources, Venugopal is in touch with the Supreme Court judges on both sides of the divide and working at an amicable solution. 바카라�He is encouraging both sides to engage with each other and resolve the matter,바카라� the official confirms. 바카라�It바카라�s unlikely to be an easy process as the four judges seem to be in no mood to back off. The Chief Justice is being nudged to find a way to resolve the issues raised by them. Let바카라�s hope it happens soon.바카라�

Senior lawyer and Rajya ­Sabha MP K.T.S. Tulsi, however, believes the four judges have 바카라�escalated the matter바카라� so much that they cannot back down now. 바카라�They have raised issues leading to a crisis of the Chief Justice바카라�s legitim­acy,바카라� Tulsi tells Outlook. 바카라�The matter must be taken to its logical conclusion. If the judges have evidence, they must produce it. There must be proper proceedings as provided by the Constitution.바카라�

Sources close to the four judges claim it is unfortunate that the entire matter has taken a political hue. 바카라�That was not the intention,바카라� says a source, requesting anonymity. 바카라�The judges never wanted it to be politicised. Their intention was only to highlight the administrative side of the judiciary and the need for reforms.바카라� Another source insists it was an impromptu press conference, not organised at the behest of any vested interests. 바카라�Presence of any person at the press conference does not mean more than what is apparent,바카라� he says. 바카라�The judges may have asked some known journalists to help spread the word about the impending press conference. That is about all. There are no motives.바카라�

Justice Gogoi is next in line to be the Chief Justice. Will the press conference, being seen as an open rebellion in certain quarters in the government, affect his chances to be the next occupant of Court No. 1?

바카라�Not really,바카라� says a BJP office-bearer. 바카라�The government cannot afford to take on the ­judiciary at this stage. Chief Justice Dipak ­Misra will retire in October. It will be close to the Lok Sabha election and the government would not like to upset anything just then. Anyway, after Justice Gogoi, there are Justi­ces Lokur and Joseph in the order of senior­ity바카라�all part of the press conference. All of them just can바카라�t be overlooked. Also, law minister Prasad talks about the excesses of the Emergency, criticising Indira Gandhi at so many public ­forums. The government cannot be seen as being unfair and arbitrary where the judiciary is concerned.바카라�

So, as things stand as we go to press, the government is taking a tempered position on the matter. That could be because it knows very well that the Justice Loya case could play a central role in the 2019 Lok Sabha election if it remains unresolved. That is the last thing it needs.