ITS seat tally halved, its vote share down by almost 27%, the shrinking of the Janata Dal (Secular) in this Assembly election is stark. For one of its candidates, it’s a double blow. Contesting on a JD(S) ticket from Bhatkal, advocate Nagendra Naik lost, notching up barely 1,500 votes, less than 1 per cent of the votes polled. This came weeks after the Supreme Court had proposed his nomination, for the fourth time, as a judge of the Karnataka High Court – even as the Centre is said to have declined its assent. “I always wanted to do public service and once I realised that my judgeship was at a dead-end,” Naik told The Indian Express, “I chose to take a plunge into politics…I decided one month ago to contest the elections.” With over 1 lakh votes, Congress candidate Mankal Vaidya won the coastal town against incumbent BJP legislator Sunil Naik who got just over 67,000 votes. On January 10 this year, the Supreme Court Collegium headed by chief Justice of India. DY Chandrachud had reiterated, for the third time, its decision to appoint Naik as a judge of the Karnataka High Court. Naik was first recommended by the SC Collegium headed by then CJI S A Bobde on October 3, 2019. This decision was reiterated on March 2, 2021 and September 1, 2021 by the Collegium headed by CJI NV Ramana. Sources told The Indian Express that the file is currently pending with the government. “I am aware that the fact that I studied in Anjuman College in Bhatkal may have been held against me. At that time, Anjuman was the only college in Bhatkal and I may have not even been an advocate if not for that college,” Naik said. Naik added that in 2018, he had written an article chronicling communal riots in the coastal region in Karnataka for a local newspaper. Studying at Dayananda Sagar Law College in Bengaluru, Naik has served as an advocate since 1993. His practice has included cases involving criminal and labour law. He gained prominence as a defence lawyer in anti-corruption cases, appearing in CBI courts for several bureaucrats and politicians. When asked if he had withdrawn his consent for being a judge before contesting elections, Naik said that he had decided not to do on “on principle.” “I have waited for (the judgeship to be cleared) for four to five years and this wait has impacted my practice. Every time news reports surfaced that my name has been reiterated, files stopped coming to my office. I knew the fate of my recommendation and, therefore, took the decision to contest,” he said. Naik admitted he is aware that this decision means that all doors to the bench are now, effectively, closed. Asked to explain his poor showing in the elections, he said: “My campaign started very late and anyway the people voted overwhelmingly for the Congress because they wanted to keep the BJP out.”
