IGNOMINY OF IMPEACHMENT
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra has created Indian judicial history by being the first CJI to face the ignominy of facing the prospect of an impeachment motion while occupying office, going by media reports. This situation has arisen because the opposition feels the CJI did not do enough to redress the grievances of the four seniormost Supreme Court judges who declared to the nation in January that “democracy was in danger.”
The four collegium members led by Justice Jasti Chelameswar told the nation that the CJI refused to listen to them when they protested against certain sensitive cases being arbitrarily assigned to junior judges with predictable outcomes. The other three senior judges were Justices Ranjan Gogoi, Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, who, with Chelameswar and the CJI, select judges for the 24 high courts and the Supreme Court. Without exception, all four have been chief justices of high courts and have spent 25 years in the judiciary.
Justice Chelameswar, who has a penchant for sending shock waves through the judiciary ever since his elevation on October 10, 2011 to the apex court, has again created a stir by writing to all the other judges protesting against the Narendra Modi government’s bid to reopen a probe against a district judge who was recommended for elevation to the Karnataka high court by the same collegium twice.
The Chief Justice of the Karnataka high court, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, reportedly dropped the probe initiated against a senior district and sessions judge, Juge P Krishna Bhat, after Justice Chelameswar wrote a scathing letter to CJI Misra questioning how the union law ministry under Prime Minister Narendra Modi could allegedly ask Justice Maheshwari to reopen the probe after he was absolved by the former chief justice of an allegedly frivolous allegation by a female judge of “atrocities and abuse of power” after she was indicted by Judge Bhat for unbecoming judicial conduct .
This bid by the Union law ministry to stall the elevation of Judge Bhat as a high court judge comes close on the heels of the blocking of Gopal Subramaniam and Justice K T Thomas as Surpeme Court judges. Justice Thomas, who had struck down President’s rule in Uttarkhand imposed by the BJP at the Centre, had embarrassed the Narendra Modi government, which may have been a reason for not elevating him to the Supreme Court despite the collegium recommending his name.
On the other hand, Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, who represented BJP strongman Amit Shah before the apex court, was elevated as a Supreme Court judge. This does not imply he is devoid of merit but given the fact that after retiring as CJI, Justice P Sathasivam attended the wedding of Amit Shah’s son at Delhi and was made Kerala governor hints at the fact that the four collegium members spoke the bitter truth when they said that “democracy was in danger” and that “some wise men should not say decades later that the four judges sold their souls.”
Given the fact that the Memorandum of Procedure allows the Modi government to block lawyers like Gopal Subramaniam for elevation as apex court judges and that the Union government told the apex court that it would not hand over the probe of the murders of rationalists like M M Kalburgi and Govind Pansare in 2015 and Narendra Dabholkar in 2013 to the National Investigation Agency (NIA) because “this was not a case of terrorism” proves democracy may indeed be in danger.
This is further bolstered by former Special Public Prosecutor Rohini Salian, declaring in October 2015 that she was clearly told by the top officers of the NIA that they did not want any of those in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blasts case to be charge-sheeted.
“I was told to take over the case by former Anti Terrorism Squad chief Hemant Karkare who phoned me and sounded very disturbed. His voice was shaking. He insisted I took over the case. After his death, I was told the NIA did not want favourable orders and I was replaced because I was neutral and fighting for justice,” Salian had said. She alleged the NIA officers were obeying the pro-Hindutva line of the government unlike former home minister P Chidambaram, whom she briefed regularly by sending notes.
Salian is insignificant compared to the likes of the Supreme Court collegiums. But coupled with the fact that the National Lawyers Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms led by Advocate Mathews Nedumpara has filed a writ petition in the Kerala high court challenging the appointment of five lawyers as high court judges because they are the kith and kin of Kerala high court judges and also the advocate general, the fact that the Modi government wants to have the last say in judicial appointments proves what Justice Chelameswar declared to the nation.
Justice Shaji Chaly adjourned the hearing of the writ petition seeking a declaration that the current practice of appointing judges by “invitation” is unconstitutional, and should be replaced by a more transparent system to allow even lawyers who practice in the lower courts for elevation as high court judges. “Today, they are completely ignored,” he told this newspaper.
Whether CJI Dipak Misra actually faces the ignominy of an impeachment motion before he demits office this year remains to be seen. But, the very fact that a draft impeachment motion against him is being circulated among the opposition MPs proves that Justice Jasti Chelameswar can sleep well at night secure in the belief that he “did not sell his soul“to the Modi government to enjoy a peaceful retired life.