SC bar association criticises justice Mishra for PM praise

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), the body of lawyers practising in the Supreme Court, passed two separate resolutions on Wednesday, one condemning the statements of Supreme Court judge, justice Arun Mishra praising Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and another on pursuing appropriate proceedings before the court in relation to Delhi violence so that suitable judicial orders can help restore normalcy in the national capital.

Supreme Court judge Arun Mishra, who on February 22 delivered the vote of thanks at the inaugural ceremony of the international judicial conference, said: “India is a responsible and most friendly member of the international community under the stewardship of the internationally acclaimed visionary Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi.” He went on to describe Modi as “a versatile genius who thinks globally and acts locally”.

The remarks by Justice Mishra came in for sharp criticism from SCBA, which, in its resolution, said such statements reflect poorly on the independence of judiciary.

The resolution added that independence of judiciary is a basic feature of the Constitution of India and judges would be best advised not to make such statements in the future or display any proximity to the executive, including high functionaries.

Such proximity and familiarity may impact judicial decision making process and give rise to justifiable doubts in the minds of the litigants about the outcome of case, the resolution went on to add. The other resolution took note of the violence in Delhi and the failure of law and order machinery to deal with it.

The bar body resolved that it would take appropriate steps to bring the issue before the Supreme Court so as to get suitable orders which will help bring the situation under control.

The resolution authorised the president of SCBA, Dushyant Dave and secretary, Ashok Arora to take appropriate action in this regard to “bring immediate normalcy in the state”.

THE REMARKS CAME IN FOR SHARP CRITICISM FROM SCBA, WHICH SAID THAT SUCH STATEMENTS REFLECT POORLY ON THE INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY