Tags:
Journalism of Courage
When the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court complains about pressure being exerted on him and fellow judges monitoring the Jain hawala case, the nation cannot but sit up. From what Justice J.S. Verma disclosed on Monday, a certain gentleman8217; approached Justice S.C. Sen and pressurised him not to hear the case, 8220;upsetting him very much.8221; Someone had made bold to approach the Chief Justice himself, though without success. Later, when Justice Sen recounted the incident to Justice Verma, they realised that in both the attempts the gentleman8217; was the same. He also made an unsuccessful attempt to meet the third judge on the bench, Justice S. P. Bharucha. Lest the nation should worry over the episode, Justice Verma has made a categorical declaration that such pressure tactics will not work. So far so good. But can Justice Verma leave the matter at that? Is not the nation entitled to know the identity of the gentleman8217; who can upset8217; a sitting judge of the highest court of the land? The very fact that he had easy access to the judge is a pointer to his high status. Or, he could have been approaching the judges on behalf of some influential persons involved in the hawala scandal. What exactly did he want? Did he just want that these judges should not monitor the hawala case? Who then are the gentleman8217;s masters? What purpose did the apex court serve by this revelation? Was it to reassure the nation that the court will not be cowed down by such threats? Is there any guarantee that the gentleman8217; had not worked on the lower level of the judiciary when the case first came up for hearing?
Countless are the questions that can be raised. The curiosity of the people having been aroused, it is only natural that they are eager to know more. Until now it was presumed that the highest court of the land was beyond the reach of such gentlemen8217;. Sadly enough, this belief has been shaken by Justice Verma8217;s revelation. Possibly, all that he intended was to let the nation know how pressurised the judges were in handling the hawala case. What he, perhaps, overlooked is that the Constitution does not expect judges to come under any such pressure. The terms of their appointment are intended to insulate them from all extraneous pressures so that they can apply their mind to the cases on hand in a fair, honest and justifiable manner. Needless to say, there cannot be any compromise on the freedom that the judges should enjoy in discharging their duties.
