S U N DAY H I N D U STA N T I M E S , N E W D E L H I
MARCH 20, 2011
think!
JUSTICE SUDERSHAN LANDMARK JUDGMENT: Pulled up the
government for failing to act against
B REDDY, 64 Hassan Ali, who evaded paying taxes
Known for his smile and patience
W
hat the hell is going on in this country?” an anguished
Justice Sudershan B Reddy had asked the solici-
tor general, recently. An otherwise quiet Judge,
perturbed over large-scale tax violations by those who have
stashed black money in foreign accounts, has taken the
government to task.
The government is having a tough time defending itself
in the case. It was at the insistence and warning of Justice
Reddy that the enforcement directorate (ED) took up the
case of stud farm owner Hassan Ali seriously. His bench
also passed the unprecedented order of cancelling a bail
granted by a sessions court and remanding an accused to
the agency’s custody. Justice Reddy’s bench had held for-
mer telecom minister A Raja’s decision to bring forward
the cut-off date while allocating 2G spectrum as illegal. He
had upheld the Delhi High Court order criticising the
government approach on the issue.
His ever-smiling visage and the patient hearing that he
EXPRESS PHOTO
JUSTICE GS SINGHVI, 62
LANDMARK JUDGMENT: Ordered CBI probe into
the 2G scam that led to the resignation of former
telecom minister A. Raja and his arrest
QUOTABLE QUOTE: “Catch the big fish in the case.
We have a large number of persons who think that
they are a law unto themselves. The 2G scam has
put all the other scams to shame”
Unsparing yet
sympathetic
T
he 2G spectrum scam has put all the other
scams to shame,” Justice GS Singhvi, heading
the bench, had said during one of the hearings.
The remarks against the executive’s functioning have
probably never been more critical. Justice Singhvi
had last year questioned the government’s decision
to continue with Raja as the telecom minister despite
the year-old CBI probe pending against him. He has
also directed the CBI to show its final investigating
report to SC before filing it in the sessions court.
Justice Singhvi has not only taken the executive to
task but hasn’t shied away from self-indictment. “The
worst has come from here (SC),” he once said in court
while referring to the mistake the apex court made
in the ADM Jabalpur case during the Emergency, sus-
pending fundamental rights. He had often pointed out
how some high court judges did not know the basic
concepts of law. Taking a dig at political parties, he
had said: “No government wants the judiciary to be
strong…a paltry allocation of 0.76 per cent of the nation-
al budget is for the judicial functioning.”
In land acquisition matters he has always stood
up in support of the “poor farmer” and has denounced
the practice of government acquiring land under the
urgency clause and paying peanuts to landowners.
Born in Jodhpur, Justice Singhvi headed the high
courts of Rajasthan, Punjab and Gujarat before being
elevated to SC.
JUSTICE DALVEER
BHANDARI, 63
QUOTABLE QUOTE: “What the hell is going on
in this country? Why had no custodial
interrogation taken place so far (of Ali)?”
gives to every advocate appearing before his bench make
him very popular with the lawyers. “Even if a matter is dis-
missed by him, one doesn’t feel bad because he does it with
such warmth and affection,” says a Supreme Court advocate.
Born in an agricultural family in the Rangareddy district
of Andhra Pradesh, he obtained a law degree in 1971 and
became the judge of Andhra Pradesh high court by 1995.
Justice Reddy’s serious approach to the problems of the
Chhattisgarh tribals has forced the state government to
reconsider its decision to support the Salwa Judum,
allegedly meant to provide self-defence training to tribals
against Naxal attacks.
When the bench learnt about the pitiful conditions of the
tribals, it advised the government to provide them an oppor-
tunity to earn and live with dignity. Against the wishes of
the state, Justice Reddy has already expressed support to
the petitioner’s demand for a high-powered committee to
monitor the rehabilitation of tribals.
YES, YOUR
HONOUR
CHANGING ORDER As judicial activism becomes the
talk of town, Bhadra Sinha profiles five Supreme Court
judges who have shaken up the system
W
hen the Indian Constitution was adopted
on November 26, 1949 after exhaustive dis-
cussions spread over two years, 11 months
and 18 days; the architects of the Bible of
our democracy envisaged a perfect balance
between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.
But some of the recent judgments and orders of the
Supreme Court (SC), including legalising passive euthana-
sia and quashing the appointment of tainted Chief Vigilance
Commissioner PJ Thomas have raised concerns about a
pro-active judiciary, ready to take on the executive or the
legislature . No wonder Justice AK Ganguly of SC recent-
ly said, “Courts are widening their jurisdiction and are now
functioning as institutions of governance and not merely
as arbitrators of disputes.” Is it good for the Indian polity?
Senior advocate Shanti Bhushan says, “The Supreme
Court has power of judicial review over every authority.
So far it had been hesitant in using this power. But faced
with cases such as 2G-spectrum scam and black money
JUSTICE MARKANDEY KATJU, 64
LANDMARK JUDGMENT: Declared passive
euthanasia legal and the SC judgment would be the
law until Parliament comes up with one
QUOTABLE QUOTE: “There is something rotten in
Allahabad High Court. Everybody knows which judge
is honest and which judge is corrupt...”
LANDMARK JUDGMENT: Directed the
government to overhaul the PDS system and
criticised it for failing on free education
Cares for the poor and hungry
I
n April 2008 when a five-judge bench headed by
Justice KG Balakrishnan upheld 27 per cent reser-
vation for OBC in higher education institutions, Justice
Dalveer Bhandari was the lone dissenting voice. While
he gave the then HRD minister Arjun Singh a clean chit
to implement the reservation for OBCs, he criticised the
government for straying away from the constitutional
mandate to build a casteless and classless society.
While reprimanding the government for not fulfilling
its duty to provide free compulsory education, he had then
observed: “Government cannot be trusted; that is pre-
cisely why we divide its powers into separate
organs…Separation of powers is an axiom of democracy.”
The bench headed by him has been vigorously pur-
suing the cause of the homeless and those living below
the poverty line. It was at his instance that the govern-
ment was forced to initiate steps and prevent the rot-
STORIES FROM A CHANGING WORLD
SONU MEHTA/HT PHOTO
issue, they have become pro-active.” He said there was
nothing wrong in courts exercising their power of
judicial review to rectify the mistakes.
While approving of the court’s intervention in high-
profile cases and monitoring of progress in investigation,
Law Commission Vice Chairman KTS Tulsi said: “Judicial
activism cannot be a substitute for good governance.”
Interestingly, the judiciary has become pro-active in the
last two decades during which India witnessed political
instability at the Centre. There have been seven gener-
al elections since 1989 and no government has enjoyed
an absolute majority since then.
“Judicial intervention — whether activist or otherwise
— can at best provide occasional solace to the Indian
citizenry, but cannot be a substitute for the much need-
ed transformation in the quality of governance based on
transparency and accountability,” says C Raj Kumar,
Professor of Law and Vice Chancellor, OP Jindal Global
University. SATYA PRAKASH
Litigant-friendly
and fearless
H
is oft-repeated words — “This is not a law college and
I am not here to teach law” — sum up what Justice
Markandey Katju, one of the most litigant-friendly
judges, is all about. In the absence of any law, the bench
headed by him legalised passive euthanasia. In the past, he
had strongly condemned judicial adventurism and
straying into the domains of the legislature and executive.
Though his euthanasia judgement is seen as just that,
critics admit that the ruling was much needed, especially
for cases where terminally ill patients are suffering.
Justice Katju, an avid reader, delivers quick verdicts and
often invokes well-known poets such as Ghalib in his orders.
He along with his colleague had recently upheld the death
sentence of Surinder Koli in the Nithari killings within 90
minutes. No advocate, howsoever senior, cannot escape the
sharp scrutiny of this judge.
His recent judgment that a mere membership of a banned
organisation is not illegal hasn’t gone down well with the
government. Unperturbed by criticism, he went a step
ahead to say if the law of the land declared such member-
ship a crime, then courts would be forced to hold it
unconstitutional citing international judgments.
Some of his observations and rulings have caught the
attention of legal and civil fraternities. But, remarks like
rakhel and “one-night stand” in a ruling on the maintenance
for women in live-in relationships drew criticism. That did
not stop him from dismissing a review petition seeking
deletion of the word “keep” from his judgment.
QUOTABLE QUOTE:“Government cannot
be trusted; that is precisely why we divide
its powers into separate organs”
ting of foodgrain. “Give it to the hungry poor instead of
it (grains) going down the drain,” he had told the
government during a hearing. He has passed a detailed
order to revamp the existing public distribution system
(PDS) and plug the loopholes.
His bench banned construction of new religious struc-
tures on public land. Calling them encroachments, the
court had warned local officials would be punished if
unauthorised structures came up. The court agreed with
the government suggestion not to remove the existing
illegal shrines in view of law and order problems.
His court has been monitoring the construction of
night shelters. The approach adopted by the bench has
brought relief to several homeless sleeping on cold pave-
ments. “Razing night shelters in peak winter is
insensitive,” he had said, while pulling up the DDA for
pulling down shelters.
| 11
VARIETY
THINKSTOCK PHOTO
JUSTICE SH KAPADIA, 63
LANDMARK JUDGMENT: Quashed the
appointment of PJ Thomas as the CVC and laid down
guidelines for future appointment
QUOTABLE QUOTE: “I personally believe that if you
follow the Constitution, you do not need to practise
any religion on the Earth”
Integrity, his
biggest asset
I
come from a poor family. I started my career as
a class IV employee and the only asset I possess
is integrity,” is what Chief Justice Sarosh Homi
Kapadia said immediately after taking over as the
head of country’s judicial system on May 12, 2010. It
reflected in his judgment quashing the appointment
of PJ Thomas as Chief Vigilance Commissioner.
The verdict declared the appointment as non-est
(does not exist) in law.
The CVC judgment revived the age-old debate
whether a resurgent judiciary has taken over the
executive’s role. But Chief Justice Kapadia’s courage
and integrity to say that all is not well with the system
has put this debate on the back-burner. Stating that
institutional integrity must be on a higher pedestal
than an individual, he dismissed the government
contention that courts could not interfere in the appoint-
ment of a CVC. “Constitutional courts’ power of judi-
cial review was a guarantee against arbitrariness in
executive actions,” he said in a special address.
His integrity was evident in his CVC judgment as
the PIL on which the verdict was pronounced was
initiated by advocate Prashant Bhushan who is
facing contempt proceedings before another bench
for levelling allegations of judicial impropriety against
Justice Kapadia. Bhushan had stated that the CJI
should not have been part of the forest bench that
gave a favourable order to Sterlite as the latter held
shares in the company.
Justice Kapadia began his life as an office assistant
who ran errands at the law firm of Behramjee
Jeejeebhoy in the 1960s. He comes from a very
humble Parsi family in Mumbai. On the first day as
the CJI, he disposed of 37 cases in 29 minutes and
warned against frivolous PILs. When the senior
members of the Bar congratulated him for taking over
as the CJI, he told them: “You are a good Bar. But I
want a pro-active Bar, not a reactive one.”
As the CJI he has given priority
to many long-pending
matters related to inad-
equate infrastruc-
ture in subordinate
judiciary and also
took the unprece-
dented move by enter-
taining a PIL filed by
an advocate who has
sought an inquiry
against former CJI
KG Balakrishnan’s kith
and kin.