PM FLAGS LAWYERS’ LETTER TO CJI ON ‘SLANDER’ OF JUDICIARY

Prime Minister Narendra Modi attacked the Congress on Thursday and said that “bullying” and “browbeating" were part of the opposition party’s antiquated culture, as he shared a screen shot of a letter addressed to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud ostensibly by a group of over 600 lawyers, including senior counsel Harish Salve, Pinky Anand, Manan Kumar Mishra and Uday Holla.

“Five decades ago itself they had called for a ‘committed judiciary’ - they shamelessly want commitment from others for their selfish interests but desist from any commitment towards the nation,” Modi wrote, referring to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s call for committed judges and committed officials. “No wonder 140 crore Indians are rejecting them (Congress),” added the PM’s post.

The letter, addressed to the CJI, expressed concerns over the actions of certain interest groups allegedly undermining the judiciary’s integrity.

Highlighting concerns over lawyers defending politicians by day and attempting to influence judges through media at night, the letter titled “Judiciary Under Threat – Safeguarding Judiciary from Political and Professional Pressure” urged safeguarding the judiciary from external pressures.

“Their antics are vitiating the atmosphere of trust and harmony, which characterises the functioning of the judiciary,” the letter said, alluding to apparent pressure tactics allegedly employed by specific interest groups to influence judicial outcomes, especially in cases involving political figures and corruption allegations.

“Some elements are trying to influence who the judges are in their cases and spread lies on social media to put pressure on them to decide in a particular way,” the letter said.

The letter did not name anyone. Many of the top signatories of the letter were from Rajasthan, suggesting that the document might have emanated from there.

The first signature, for instance, was of Anand Purohit, president of the Rajasthan high court lawyers association.

Purohit, however, told HT he was not involved in preparing the letter’s draft and was approached by a group of lawyers for his signature. “Senior advocates had given a memorandum to the Chief Justice of India, and I signed the letter yesterday. I read the memorandum. It talked about political pressure on the judiciary,” he said. Purohit added that he wanted the letter to also mention the massive pressure on the judiciary from capitalists.

He did not mention who initiated or drafted the letter.

The controversy comes close on the heels of some of the Supreme Court’s significant verdicts. Two cases, in particular, garnered widespread attention for their implications on electoral transparency and local governance. In the much-anticipated electoral bond (EB) case, a Constitution bench quashed the 2018 scheme while sanctifying the voter’s right to know and marking a significant step towards promoting fairness and integrity in India’s elections.

In another significant ruling last month, the Supreme Court intervened to uphold the sanctity of democratic institutions by nixing the Chandigarh mayoral election, citing irregularities and procedural lapses.

The letter also mentioned allegations of bench fixing. “They have also concocted an entire theory of ’bench fixing’ which is not just disrespectful and contemptuous but an attack on the honour and dignity of courts,” the letter said.

“They have also stooped to the level of comparing our courts to those countries where there is no rule of law and accusing our judicial institutions with unfair practices,” it added.

In the past, some lawyers have written to the CJI and the court registry, claiming arbitrary change in listing of select matters in the top court. The controversy erupted in December when some sensitive and high-profile cases were assigned to justice Bela M Trivedi’s bench.

Justice Trivedi served on Gujarat and Rajasthan high courts before coming to the top court.

Manan Kumar Mishra, chairman of the Bar Council of India, confirmed endorsing the letter, stating that over 600 lawyers had supported it. “Our attempt is to say there is no threat to judiciary as projected by certain vested interest groups. The judiciary is discharging its duties fairly and efficiently,” Mishra added. Former additional solicitor general Pinky Anand also confirmed her endorsement.

The letter sparked a political controversy just weeks before the general elections kick off. “Modi ji, India’s institutions are the property of India’s people. You are personally responsible for usurping their powers and weakening our country. The Congress party helped build and nurture these institutions. Thousands of our workers and leaders gave their lives for them. We will take these institutions back from you and return them to the people of India,” said Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge.

Expressing worry over the propagation of false narratives about the judiciary’s past, the letter accused certain groups of attempting to discredit ongoing proceedings and undermine public confidence in the courts. It called for a united stand to protect the judiciary’s integrity and urged decisive leadership to address these challenges.

The letter put the spotlight firmly on the Supreme Court amid allegations of the central government undermining democratic institutions’ independence. Recent events, including a Calcutta high court judge’s resignation to join the ruling BJP and allegations of biased rulings, have only fuelled concerns about political interference in the judiciary.

Further, the Supreme Court found itself mired in a controversy sparked by letters shot to the CJI and the court registry by senior counsel Dushyant Dave and advocate Prashan Bhushan. The controversy erupted in December when some sensitive and high-profile cases were assigned to justice Trivedi’s bench, leading to speculation and raising questions about the impartiality of the judicial process.

The issue prompted a sharp response from CJI Chandrachud, who called it “surprising” that some lawyers want their cases to be listed before specific judges and not before some others although all judges are to be treated equal on judicial side.

While responding to a query about listing of former Delhi minister Satyender Jain’s bail plea in a money laundering case before justice Trivedi’s bench, the CJI took umbrage at the letters he said were being flung in the court registry while complaining why matters were being allegedly pulled out from the benches they were initially assigned to.

“It’s very easy to fling allegations and letters...It’s extremely surprising for the members of the bar to say that I want A particular judge to hear my matter and not judge B to hear it. All judges are equal for us,” justice Chandrachud said on December 14.

Read more news like this on HindustanTimes.com

2024-03-29T00:18:42Z dg43tfdfdgfd