“How could we assess a judge’s suitability for the Supreme Court without reading their prominent judgments?” Justice (retd) Sanjay Kaul asks in his memoir, arguing that both the quality of judgments and the speed with which cases were disposed of mattered.
When he entered the collegium under Chief Justice N V Ramana, Justice Kaul had insisted that the judgments and disposal records of candidates be circulated before discussions on appointments.
He argued that it was extraordinary that judges could be considered for elevation to the Supreme Court without their colleagues first examining their judicial work. Ramana had told him that this had not been the established practice and that collecting the material would take time.
However, Justice Kaul refused to allow the process to proceed without it.
In 2023 immediately after his retirement, Justice Kaul had said:
"I feel that the collegium system served a very good purpose at a particular time. But over a period of time, my view is it is not working as it should have been working; not because of the failure of the system but because some of us (judges) did not rise to the occasion.
"Our appointment process envisages consultation. There is an opinion of the chief justice, collegium’s opinion, government’s view, Intelligence Bureau’s opinion, so many things come into it.
But there is a lack of sync in the selection which has created this situation, and, in this process, we will never be able to fill in the vacancies abiding by the timelines."
Former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kaul has triggered a political controversy after raising questions about former Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud’s approach to judicial appointments.
Notably, in 2024 when judgement on 'electoral bond' came; it was DYC -- who had emerged as the apple of the eye of the opposition. Just one Ganesh puja in his house - destroyed DYC's Sickular tag.
Now, according to Kaul, Justise Chandrachud wanted to seek the government’s views on proposed judicial appointments before the Supreme Court Collegium formally deliberated on the names, a practice Kaul reportedly disapproved.
The Congress now questions the independence of the judiciary under the Modi government.
On Sunday, 25th October, a Congress leader Jai-rahim cited a report based on Kaul’s forthcoming memoir, "Without Fear or Favour", and accused the government of exerting pressure on the judiciary.
The Congress claims that the book raised “serious questions” about judicial independence and referred to allegations of government involvement in appointments.
Justice Chandrachud, however, says that the collegium’s official records showed that its resolutions, along with the reasons for its recommendations, were made public on the Supreme Court’s website and that the decisions were unanimous, with Justice Kaul endorsing every recommendation.
Chandrachud also claimed that the meetings were conducted in a congenial atmosphere.
In 2015, Justice Kaul made headlines.
Madras High Court Judge, Justice C.S.Karnan, wrote a letter to Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul with copies marked to President of India and Chief Justice of India, accusing Kaul of Harassment and belittlement.
Justice Chandrachud added there was not a single instance of Justice Kaul recording a dissent when the collegium formally proposed candidates to the government for appointment as judges. He said this was an important part of the record to consider while assessing the decision-making process.
Justice Chandrachud also emphasised that collegium decisions were not arrived at abruptly in meetings.
“Judges held multiple rounds of informal and formal discussions before names were officially considered and recommendations sent to the government”, he said, adding that Justice Kaul had never walked out of any such meeting.
ends
No comments:
Post a Comment