Let CJI or Collegium judges hear all PILs: Bar association

The SCBA also said the differences expressed by the judges at the press conference were of “grave concern” and “should be immediately considered by the Full Court of the Hon’ble Supreme Court”.

By: Express News Service | New Delhi | Updated: January 14, 2018 8:02 am
Supreme court, SC collegium, CJI, CJI decision, Bae association, Bar association supreme court, SC collegium, Judge Loya death case. Loya case probe, PILs, Dipak Misra, The petition in the Loya case is currently being heard by a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Mohan M Shantanagoudar, and is due to come up for hearing on January 15. (Express Photo by Tashi Tobgyal)

THE SUPREME Court Bar Association (SCBA) on Saturday demanded that all PILs, including the one seeking a probe into the death of Special CBI Judge B H Loya — who had been hearing the Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter case — should be heard by the Chief Justice of India or any of the other four top judges who comprise the Supreme Court Collegium.

Announcing the resolutions adopted at an “emergent meeting” of its executive committee, SCBA president and senior advocate Vikas Singh said: “It is unanimously resolved by the executive committee of the Supreme Court Bar Association that all PIL matters, including the pending PIL matters, should be either taken up by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, or, if he has to assign to any other Bench, it should be assigned to the judges in the Collegium. Even the matters listed on Monday, 15th January, 2018, should be transferred as per our request.”

Asked if this meant the SCBA found substance in the objections raised by the four senior judges — Justices Jasti Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph — regarding allocation of cases to junior judges by CJI Dipak Misra, Singh said such allocation of work had been done in the past too. For instance, the 2G case was allocated to Justice G S Singhvi when he was the 11th Judge (in seniority), said Singh.

The SCBA also said the differences expressed by the judges at the press conference were of “grave concern” and “should be immediately considered by the Full Court of the Hon’ble Supreme Court”. SCBA president Singh said they would meet the CJI and the four judges, and added that the matter should be sorted out by them, behind closed doors.

Asked about the Loya PIL, he said the SCBA would not comment on individual matters as it was not privy to what happened in the cases.

The petition in the Loya case is currently being heard by a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Mohan M Shantanagoudar, and is due to come up for hearing on January 15. However, since Justice Shantanagoudar won’t be available, the matters listed for that day will be taken up on January 16.

Meanwhile, in a related development, the Bar Council of India (BCI) said the judges going public with their grievances was “not good” for the judicial system.

BCI Chairman Manan Mishra said: “Judges coming out in the media is not good for the judicial system. We will talk about the issue raised in the letter with the individual judges and then seek an opinion on the issue. After that, we will meet the four judges who held the press conference. After listening to them, we will meet the CJI. The aim is to resolve the issue.”

He said the BCI had formed a seven-member delegation to first meet the 20 Supreme Court judges to discuss the issues raised in the letter made public by the four judges on Friday. The delegation will start meeting the judges individually from Sunday.

The BCI also appealed to parties not to politicise the current issue. “The fact that there is a debate on television on the rift between the judges is unfortunate. People have started pointing fingers at the judiciary now. Such opportunity should not be given to anyone,” he said.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. Sudheer Thaakur
    Jan 15, 2018 at 1:41 am
    Are we in for a new judicial apartheid regime? Cases settled in hierarchy of importance . Maybe 4 varnas like of manusmriti to be handled by similarly class differentiated judges based on seniority. PILs perhaps on top of heap of salience to be handled only by the Brahmins of the court- members of collegiums. And less important cases involving disputes between ordinary citizens consigned to the bottom of heap classified as unimportant if not frivolous to be handled by Shudras of the court- the junior most.
    (0)(0)
    Reply
    1. Kushal Kumar
      Jan 14, 2018 at 5:26 pm
      This Vedic astrology writer’s related predictions in article - “ Astrologically speaking , some highlights for India in coming year 2018” - published last year at theiniapost on 19 October , 2017. Just reproducing : -“ The year 2018 looks to be bringing to focus themes of political , religious or spiritual nature for a heightened or sharp analysis or discussion. Such analysis or discussion could also pave way for new enactments or judicial pronouncements having far reaching significance or value covering issues related to ……….political class”. Here , the words political and spiritual also include judiciary because they exercise sovereign power of State and are required to be ‘spiritual’ in that exercise, which means absolute honesty , integrity and devotion to the Cons ution. So intent of the prediction can be read to cover themes of judiciary
      (0)(0)
      Reply
      1. Indian Singh
        Jan 14, 2018 at 8:58 am
        As per the CONSTI-TUTION OF INDIA all SC JUDGES from the JUNIOR MOST to SENIOR MOST including CJI has equal judicial powers. If that consti-tutional judicial provision is violated, it will lead to miscarriage of justice as SENIOR JUDGES will FORCE THEIR OPINION ON JUNIOR JUDGES. .... It's the USE or APPLICATION of the additional ADMINISTRATIVE POWERS of CJI which is being questioned by these MUTINYING FOUR SENIOR JUDGES. ................ (MUTINY is an occasion when a group of people, especially soldiers or sailors, refuses to obey legitimate orders and/or attempts to take control from people in authority). ................... One AMONGST the MUTINYING JUDGE being SON of EX-CONGRESS CM of ASSAM gives credence to POLITICAL ANGLE to the MUTINY.
        (2)(4)
        Reply
        1. Rakesh Katyal
          Jan 14, 2018 at 8:41 am
          CJI has been targeting this PIL industry and that’s where the problem lies. So much money is involved that the judges want CJI impeachment rather than crush this dirty money industry.
          (1)(11)
          Reply