Page 3 - Tehelka Issue 8&9
P. 3

Editor’s Note






                 Higher Judiciary: No winners


                 but office of CJI is the loser





                               the recent rift between the ex-  removal motion is new low for the body politic because
                                ecutive and the judiciary over ju-  such a measure requires consensus and thinking.  The
                                 dicial appointments is not a new   danger of such a cavalier precedent is that political
                                 development but Centre dragging   parties could make a habit of using the impeachment
                                 its feet on the elevation of Ut -  motion to intimidate judiciary. This would weaken the
                                 tarkhand Chief Justice C J Joseph to   great institution. There are no winners in this but the
                                the Supreme Court has the potential   biggest loser is the highest court of justice. In fact some
                              to open a Pandora’s box. Law Minister   of most eminent jurists have also criticised the move.
                           Ravi Shankar Prasad’s explanation about   The ongoing internal tussle in the Supreme Court
                  disapproval on the grounds that Justice Joseph is too   has also done an irreparable damage to the office of
                  junior in the all-India list of judges and that there is an   the apex court leaving common people baffled. Chinks
                  imbalance in the regional representation in the Su-  in the higher judiciary were visible after the first-ever
                  preme Court, clearly means scrutiny from body politi-  press conference by the top four judges of the Supreme
                  cal into the affairs of the apex court.     Court in which they levelled allegations against the CJI.
                    This comes almost immediately after the motion of   Not surprisingly, the polity was bound to exploit the
                  impeachment of the Chief Justice of India that had been   opportunity to gain brownie points. But at what cost?
                  rejected by the vice-president of India. The vice-presi-  When the lordships failed to arrest the slide in recti-
                  dent has the powers to reject the impeachment notice   tude, the matter entered into the political domain. By
                  and he has rightly chosen the grounds that the charges   far impeachment of a Judge has never happened in our
                  did not constitute misconduct or incapacity. Section   country but because the controversy involves the CJI, it
                  3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 that deals with the   does not bode well for the highest office of judiciary. Im-
                  procedure for the investigation and proof of the mis-  peachment is too serious to be used on grounds of disa-
                  behavior or incapacity of a Judge of the Supreme Court   greement. Indian judiciary has time and again shown
                  or of a High Court states that the presiding officer may   itself resilient for self-correction and it will come out
                  admit or refuse to admit the motion after holding con-  unscathed from this uncalled move too..
                  sultations with such persons as he thinks fit, and con-
                  sidering the material before him. Also, the CJI is free to
                  allocate cases as “master of the roster” and there being
                  no “proven misconduct” or “incapacity”, there is no
                  constitutional basis for the notice to be admitted. The              (charanjit ahuja)






                                            WeB                        circulation tEam  Uma shankar tiwari,
                                            Editor (digital mEdia)  Yashica Jalhotra
                                                                       Amit sharma, suraj singh
                                            design teAM                accounts  deepika rattan, pradeep sharma
                                            Vikram nongmaithem, Aditi Chahar,    print E r  &  publish E r
                 Editor  Charanjit Ahuja*   Anangpal singh, Ajoy sen
                 associatE Editor  Abdul Wasey                         swinder Bajwa
                                                                       printed & published by swinder Bajwa on behalf
                 stAte Correspondents       pHoto seCtion
                                            sr photo coordinator  deepak Jha  of Anant Media pvt. ltd.
                 pari saikia  (dElhi)                                  published from
                 riyaz Wani  (srinagar)     Ad sAles & MArketing       anant media pvt ltd,
                 Mudit Mathur (lucknow)     chief manager Zakia khan   building no 23, nehru place,
                                            adsales@tehelka.com
                 rakesh rocky (shimla)                                 new delhi-110019
                 Bharat Hiteshi (chandigarh)   sYsteMs                 printEd at m.p. printers,
                                            sumit rawat
                 Manpreet singh (JamshEdpur)  Aamir shafi              b-220, phase-ii, noida, up
                 *(Editor for purpose of prb act 1867)  managEr-production  piyush srivastava  E-mail editor@tehelka.com
                         Volume 15, Issue no. 8&9, 16 Apr Il-15 mAy 2018, released on 1 mAy, number of pages including cover 68
                               for enquiries & complaints call delhi:  011-40600890 or email: wecare@tehelka.com


 Add.indd   13  02/05/18   4:42 PM  3 Editor'sNote.indd   3                                           02/05/18   5:18 PM
   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8