Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Another SC judge recuses from provident fund siphoning case

What exactly is wrong with attitude of senior judiciary? Yes, we are not talking about District or even High court, but judges of the supreme court!

They don' t want to be subject to the same rules which they wholeheartedly want other public servants and public to follow.

Read news of recent 'altercation' between SC judge and SC lawyers:

Some excerpts from news and my comments follow:

“I am not a sanyasi that I can keep my cool,” Justice B.N. Agarwal said and withdrew from the case after warning senior counsel and former law minister Shanti Bhushan not to argue like a “street urchin”.

Isn't this more of an emotional tantrum where judge wants to show himself off as a responsible parent in face of childish behaviour from senior lawyer? Let's see next what did lawyer say to judge.

When the court reconvened today after yesterday’s daylong hearing, Agarwal took offence at Bhushan’s argument that Balakrishnan’s instructions gave the impression that the court was trying to shield “corrupt” judicial officers.

“These remarks are contemptuous,” Agarwal thundered.

Yes of course. In name of contempt of court, everyone including media, common people, and bloggers like me are scared to say anything which might be construed as contempt of court. And who decides what is contempt of court? Of course the judges!

Sparks flew again when Bhushan Senior contended that an earlier judgment, which makes the Chief Justice’s nod mandatory to file an FIR or a chargesheet against a sitting judge, should not apply in this case.

“Public confidence demands that the court order a free and impartial inquiry into the case,” he argued.

“If that protection is removed, what will happen to the independence of the judiciary?” Agarwal replied. “Cases will be filed against honest judges and they will be arrested and thrown in jails.”

But Bhushan insisted that the role of the judges in the scam be probed under the general criminal law which applies to all.

If they are honest, nothing will come out of the probe, he said. “The Supreme Court should not give the impression that it is trying to shield corrupt judicial officers,” he repeated.

Exactly. Mr Bhushan has said it clearly what is nagging the minds of common public of India for so long. If common public, and even politicians can face false charges and be ready to face trial; what is so special about judges?

The concept being touted about is independence of judiciary. Is protection from false cases alone enough to ensure independence of judiciary? What about lure of money which corrupt politicians and businesspeople may be too ready to shower upon judiciary? How do we ensure judiciary remains independent from that?

“You have no respect for anybody. Not even one judge of the Supreme Court,” Agarwal fumed and then passed orders saying that “since it was not conducive to hear the case” he was recusing himself.

Well Mr judge of Supreme Court, even common people are losing faith in judges of SC. It was Chief Justice of supreme court who recently said that judges should not be pressed to declare their assets because it may lead to false cases against them. Then who protects common public when common people have to face false cases, many a time with support of corrupt police and executive? People in responsible positions should gladly accept *higher* standards of disclosure than common public! It is upto them to suggest ways how false cases can be avoided or such people punished for filing false cases. You cannot simply shirk away this responsibility with a holier-than-thou attitude.

Now another supreme court judge has recused himself from the case. What kind of a game is this where judges simply recuse themselves from an important case, which involves pension money of common people?

No comments:

Post a Comment