Ex- CJI Thakur slams 4 senior SC judges for Jan. 12 presser

New Delhi: Former Chief Justice of India T. S. Thakur on Saturday spoke out against the controversial January 12 press conference held by four senior judges of the Supreme Court, saying they “need not look for outside help for resolving their institutional problems”. Justice Thakur was referring to the presser by four senior judges — Justices J. Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, M. B. Lokur and Kurian Joseph — who had virtually raised revolt against CJI Dipak Misra by levelling litany of allegations against him. They had alleged that the situation in the top court was “not in order” and many “less than desirable” things have taken place, which has put the “democracy at stake”. The former CJI, who dubbed the presser as a “disturbing” event, said that the issues brought into public domain in the press conference gave the media and the politicians an opportunity to discuss matter which “ought to have been addressed and solved within the confines of the Supreme Court”. “Breaking away from tradition, four senior judges of the Supreme Court brought into public domain certain issues which had caught the limelight and had given the media and politicians an opportunity to talk about and discuss matters which can and indeed ought to have been addressed and solved within the confines of the Supreme Court. No political party or media house or politician can be accused of indiscretion when judges of the Supreme Court make a public statement that democracy in the country is in danger,” he said. Justice Thakur said that when judges want the nation to decide issues, which they can and ought to decide themselves, anyone witnessing it would feel disturbed by the development that the highest judiciary was unable to decide issues concerning its working and was taking it to the public at large. “When a strong and disturbing statement, like selling of souls by the judges appears in the media; when judges want the nation to decide issues, which they can and ought to decide themselves, anyone who is connected to the institution and even dispassionate observers would feel disturbed by the development where judges are unable to decide issues concerning working of their institution and seek to take the same to the public at large,” he said.