The Esteem of the Supreme Court of India
A Short Article By Dibyajyoti Purushottam, 20-Nov-2021
An analysis of how the Esteem and Reverence enjoyed by the Supreme Court
of India is decided by its own action.
The Supreme Court (SC) of India, which we all Indians hold high esteem of
is now in the midst of certain kind of threat from a small coterie which exert
tremendous amount of pressure in the Social Media (SM) backed by power,
politics, money, influence, technology, social followers, anti-establishment /
national inclination, mob power and so on. They compel the honourable judges
for certain kind of judgements, failing which the judges are subjected to
massive “trolls” in the SM. This situation has led to a recent recusal of two
very senior judges in a case regarding the river water sharing case.
Now, if one analyses the cause closely, one is surprised that the SC
itself is the major contributor. Let’s elaborate:
We all know that the SC is the supreme interpreter of Law and
Constitution. We all have learnt as students that the Constitution must be
followed in “Letter & Spirit”.
But unfortunately, everybody tries to follow in “Letter” only, and that
too in a subjective / selective manner to suit something or somebody. The
“Spirit” is missing altogether which may be called “Logic” or the “Rationale”.
Most of the times it is noticed that the cases are decided more by the
level of “Reputation” of the representing Lawyer and less by the merit of the
case.
A classic example is the case of a renowned SC advocate who had tweeted
offensive material against a few senior Justices of the SC. The contempt of
courts case was upheld and he was fined only one Rupee.
This fact may be interpreted as the worth of “Esteem” or “Reverence” of
the SC is a mere one Rupee. The SC itself has fixed a value to its own esteem /
reverence as one Rupee.
Likewise, several senior level judges’ protest against the CJI creates a
bad precedent. If the judges don’t honour their senior colleagues then how do
they expect others to honour them?
We know that the “Freedom of Speech” is a fundamental right. But if you
think rationally, you will find it is NOT ABSOLUTE, and NOT Limitless or
Unlimited. On the other hand there is a scope for “Defamation Suite”- it means
that you have to find the thin line on the basis of the civilised norms.
Someone called the duly elected Prime Minister of India a thief, and he
gets away with it advised not to do it again, the other uses gibberish about
the judges, and pays a fine of one Rupee. Some young techies conspire against
the nation, and get bail swiftly and continue to do the same, some so-called
human rights activists planning to eliminate the democratically elected PM,
enjoy social protection and cosy life.
But the SC would never come to the rescue of common people who suffered
blockage of roads for over a year, mass exodus of a community out of fear of
life, etc. What do all these show? This is anybody’s guess.
Most of the PILs accepted by the SC for hearing are selected to please
some pressure groups.
The SC is often selective in choosing the so called “Suo Motu” cases and
pass judgement against majority groups who are soft targets.
On the other hand, the SC dreads passing judgement against some minority
groups over the fear of retribution.
For example, the SC is more concerned about the height of “Dahi Handi” in
a Maharashtra festival than the open violence against the majority community in
Bengal, Kerala, Kashmir, etc.
Unable to set its own house, it tries to interfere in too many cases with
the executive. We have several examples of the SC reprimanding the Central
& State Govt.s but never the unlawful protesters, all in the name of
freedom of speech & protest to show its magnanimity.
The chief job of the SC is to interpret the Constitution in its proper
prospective, and not advise the Government how to legislate. Just like the SC
doesn’t like to be advised in its own matters, so also the Govt.
The bottom line is that “To err is Human”. We are all humans, and it’s
the same humans who man all the trades and services. In all professions we have
good people and bad too. Out of the whole lot we respect the most- the Armed
Forces and the Judiciary. In a recently published book, a former CJI says
“Criticize the Judgement if you want, but NOT the Judge”. Very right indeed -
but he never said that “Criticize the Government / governance if you want, but
NOT the individuals behind it”, and I doubt if ever he would. Needless to say,
that the very same CJI revolted against another CJI denting the reputation of
the highest Judiciary Institution.
The morale of the whole story is that the SC is solely responsible for its own esteem or disrepute, and the process to attain reverence should not only be transparent, but also be ostensible and timely.
