Anil Divan’s ‘Limited by Law’ (Jan 8, 2002), is timely in this age of IT and openness. Some basic changes in the form of Judicial reforms are needed to be carried out to the institution of judiciary.
It should be worth noting that only public servants inducted into Government service in India without conducting any screening test or examination are
1) Judges, 2) Politicians (Law Makers) and 3) Governors
In fact, presently any (litigious) lawyer till yesterday can become an Honorable Judge the next day. When all Indian services are recruited through Public Service Commission, appointment of Judges to Supreme Court and High Courts are made exclusively from lawyers.
As the laws of judiciary and system under which it operates serves the public very little, It has been kept as it is for the past nearly 100 years.
A person without any basic qualification in Engineering or Medicine or Science can become a Minister in the respective Ministries. Whereas Law Minister needs to be a Law graduate (traditionally).
Watch my Videos on YouTube channel
Here lies the problem. How can one expect a Lawyer-Minister to think objectively and decide against professional needs of the lawyers and do some thing for the benefit of the common man? What stops our law makers to change this anomaly?
Moreover, law of contempt and thereby accruing sanctity to the offices of judiciary prevents public scrutiny.
It is a truth that corruption prevails in lower courts with or without the complicity of the Magistrates/Judges. When the affected goes on appeals no further trails or re-examination of witnesses or re-submission of evidences are permitted under law. Only procedural elements are verified in the Appellate Courts. This implies that a person with influence, power or money can ‘manage’ the case in trail courts and set the course of the case in his favour for ever. So that cases in India are steered to the disadvantages of common man?
State of affairs would not be expected to change as long as the Judiciary lies as pocket burrough of the elite and the Legislators. And justice eludes the common man unless corruption is weeded out and accountability is brought into the Institution of Judiciary.
( This letter was written by me , DVS Janardan Prasad on 17.01.2002 in The Indian Express daily ).
It is true that Summer vacation for Courts is a relic of British times. It is every body’s knowledge. But K Shyam Sundar,advocate who filed the PIL, must be thanked and hailed for taking the issue before the very Court itself.
This letter to the editor, The Indian Express was written by me on 17.01.2002.
ALSO READ
- Fundamental rights
- Basic features of the Constitution
- Freedom Movement
- Nasadiya Sukta
- Atharva veda
- Jawaharlal Nehru 1889-1940
- Mahatma Gandhi 1869-1915
Post retirement Posts for Judges
Page Contents
Just like posts of CAG and Election Commissioner, High Court and Supreme Court Judges also must be barred from taking ‘POSTS’ after retirement, in order to make Judiciary independent of Executive, the Government of India at New Delhi. Comptroller and Auditor General Mr. Vinod Rai must be hailed for his frank anguish over state of affairs with regard to bullying by Political class. You know why and how could CAG took courage and become bold enough to criticize the Government and the Establishment.
I think that one and only foremost reason for this is that CAG, like Election Commissioner is barred from taking up any Government post after retirement.
If High Court and Supreme Court Judges are also barred from ‘POSTS’ after retirement, Judgments from High and Supreme Courts would be more objective and of course more censures against the Governmnt.
** This comment was written by me in Times of India in response to news item ‘People who have mandate to rule are typical ‘bullies’, CAG Vinod Rai says dt 16.2.13.
CJI is candid enough to accept the truth that Government ( Executive ) and Judiciary are coordinating in serving each other. Apparently at the cost of Checks and Balances.
Chief Justice says that ‘final budgetary allocation is the prerogative of the executive. However, once the allocation is made, we all believe that the time has come to seriously engage on the issues of financial autonomy for the judiciary.’ Then how can Judiciary attain Autonomy? Government lacks sincerity to reform Judiciary and make it independent.
On the one hand Government says that practice of appointment of retired judges as heads of Commissions etc would be dispensed with. But the “benefits” to the judges continue in the form of rise of retirement age by another 3 years ? What is this ? Government and Judiciary take people for a run and Justice eludes common man. Because there would be no check against Governments’ arbitrary actions even after reforms are effected.
The above two letters were written by me in Times of India in response to news item, Judiciary, legislature need to coordinate: CJI dt. 5th Aprl, 2015, Times of India. Viewing judiciary and legislature as “siblings”, Chief Justice of India H L Dattu on Sunday pressed for coordination as well as correcting each other in case the path laid down by the Constitution is deviated from.
dent on Checks and Balances
CBI chief says he is part of the Government. This kind of mindset is a dent on Checks and Balances provided in the Constitution of India. All MPs and MLAs in India think they are part of Government but technically it is not so. And People think Judiciary is part of the Government but technically not true. #ChecksandBalances in Indian Polity have got diluted because of this ‘part of the Government syndrome’.
- Agree (5)Disagree (0)Recommend (4)Offensive
- SC’s caged parrot remark is correct: CBI chief Ranjit Sinha“, dt 9.5.13. CBI chief Ranjit Sinha accepted the SC’s observation that the country’s premier investigating agency was a “caged parrot” that “speaks in its master’s voice”.
I think India is ruled from New Delhi as if it is an Absolutist regime. Several Organs of Indian democracy slowly but irrevocably turned into a single entity under the iron fist of New Delhi’s ruling political party. So CBI need not be an exception. Coalgate: Supreme Court’s three options to CBI“, dt. 8.5.13. Supreme Court went on to say that the CBI must know how to stand up against all pulls and pressures by government and its officials.Economic Times
We believe that Supreme Court is supreme. But it is not independent. In legal parlance Government and Judiciary are not independent entities but interdependently independent. That is why we in India get few Judgments from Supreme court of High courts that run against Governments. In this context it may be noted that SC and HC judges not only are appointed by the Center but also are ‘promoted’ after their retirement by the Government.