The Hindu : Appeal to over-rule 'Veerasamy judgment'

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Dec 20, 2002

National

National

Appeal to over-rule 'Veerasamy judgment'

By Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI DEC. 19. The Committee on Judicial Accountability (CJA) has appealed to the Chief Justice of India (CJI), V.N. Khare, to suo motu consider and overrule the "Veerasamy judgment" and remove the requirement of prior permission of the CJI for registration of offences committed by members of the higher judiciary.

The CJA, comprising eminent lawyers, V.M. Tarkunde, Ram Jethmalani, Shanti Bhushan, Rajendra Sachar, D.S. Tewatia, Anil Divan, Indira Jaising, Kamini Jaiswal, Prashant Bhushan, Arvind Nigam and Hardev Singh, in a resolution said the judicial scandal that had surfaced in Punjab, Karnataka and Rajasthan had demonstrated that the "Veerasamy judgment" prohibited the registration of FIR and initiation of criminal proceedings against a judge without the CJI's prior permission.

In a resolution, the CJA said that despite several allegations of judicial misconduct amounting to criminal offences coming from various parts of the country against judges, "there has not been a single case where the CJI has himself asked the CBI or the police to investigate an offence against a judge".

The normal rule of law must prevail and the CJI should reconsider and overrule the above judgment. "If the Supreme Court fails to do this, the CJA would urge the Government and Parliament to enact suitable legislation to overrule this judgment," it said.

Referring to the issue of contempt notices against newspapers and journalists by the Karnataka High Court, the CJA said that "any allegation against a judge which is true or which has been made in good faith and on some reasonable basis, cannot be made the subject of a contempt action".

It said that exposing judicial corruption was in the public interest and this could not be done unless the law of contempt was appropriately reformed and amended and truth or good faith were made good defences in a contempt action.

The credibility of the judiciary and the faith of the ordinary people in the administration of justice were at stake. Unless urgent steps were taken to make the higher judiciary accountable, misconduct in judiciary and public disquiet about it were bound to increase.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National