“Har shaakh pe ullu baitha hai…”
Some of you may have already picked this up “Congress alleges bias in Noida land deals“. If not, read on:
“Senior Union Minister Kapil Sibal on Sunday released a list of individuals, judges and bureaucrats who were granted plots in Noida on the outskirts of Delhi….
…The list released by the Congress includes Sheeba Sabhrawal, daughter-in-law of the former CJI YK Sabhrawal, Aarohi Bhalla, son of Justice Bhalla, who’s recent promotion was questioned by President APJ Abdul Kalam.
It also includes sitting judges of the Allahabad High Court Justice Uday Kriand Justice Poonam Srivastava. The list says Flex industries and its Ashok Chaturvedi, known to be close to UP’s ruling party, received as many as six plots.
…This is the first time an allegation has been made about a nexus between the top judiciary and a political party.�Notably, all 625 allotments were cancelled on the orders of the Allahabad High Court on complaints that this allotment was arbitrary and lacked transparency in 2005.
The previous chief justice of India whose daughter-in-law’s name is on the list accused the Congress of playing dirty politics on the judiciary.”
In his defense, Justice Sabhrawal said that ”...Six or seven people from my family applied which includes my two sons two daughters-in-law, my mother, my brother, and his daughter. To assume that there was favouritism in this draw of lots is madness…” – fair enough but how is the CJI’s family able to afford all the plots? – what if all the plots applied for had been alloted?
Its gets curiouser: “…six people with the same address from Flex Industries were alloted plots.� Another 13 allotments had the same bank account….According to the list, the then Advocate General Virendra Bhatia also got four plots.”
Why is this news? Because it exposes – yet once again – how deep the rot goes.
I’m trying to get my hands on the full list.
The irony is of course that Shri Sibal’s party itself is hardly a model of virtue.
Have you managed the complete list of allotees.
Can you make it public?
Evan: Unfortunately, I still have not been able to get my hands on the full list although a determined web search should reveal it (I hope).
Will keep you all posted. Thanks.
‘Judges’ wealth info can’t be shared’ by Nagendar Sharma (November 06, 2008)
Excerpts from Supreme Court in public eye by Sandhya Jain
…But the piece de resistance is the Supreme Court approaching the Delhi High Court for relief against the verdict of the Central information Commission, bringing the Chief Justice of India under the purview of the Right to Information Act. Expectedly, it got a stay order, and the case is now posted for hearing on 12 February 2009.
The case is astounding for the bizarre fact that in the (albeit unlikely) event of losing in the High Court, the Supreme Court will naturally suffer immense damage to its prestige. And if it seeks relief against this judicial rebuff, it will be appealing to itself as the apex court! It will thus be both the petitioner and the judge – a situation unprecedented in the annals of judicial history.
The origins of the current crisis lay in the 1997 Full Court Resolution of the Supreme Court that judges must declare their assets: “Every judge should make a declaration of all his/her assets in the form of real estate or investments, held by him/her or spouses or dependants, within a reasonable time of assuming office.†Additional declarations must be made each time they acquire additional property or make further investments of a substantial nature.
It seems, however, that these noble intentions were never adhered to, either in the apex or any of the high courts. Matters came to a head when a Delhi textile trader, S.C. Agrawal, irked by the behaviour of a particular judge, filed an RTI appeal in 2007, asking if judges declared their assets to the respective Chief Justices. The CIC upheld his demand to know if the 1997 Full Court Resolution was being implemented on 6 January 2009.
Though the appeal did not seek details of the judges’ assets, the Supreme Court became defensive and challenged the CIC’s right to know if the declarations were being made at all. Simultaneously, public pressure compelled Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan to write to all High Court Chief Justices in August 2008 to ensure that the Full Court Resolution of 1997 is honoured. But it is clear that the honourable judges are extremely uncomfortable about declaring their assets, in the manner that MPs and MLAs do.
In its official spat with the CIC, the Supreme Court in November 2008 held that declaration of assets by judges before the Chief Justice of India (CJI) was “voluntary†and in his personal capacity; that the Full Court Resolution was not an official document; and that the disclosures were not meant for the public. This prompted Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah to ask if declarations made to the CJI are intended to be passed on to successor-judges in office.
To a dispassionate observer, the Supreme Court is clearly on the back foot in this case. The movement for greater judicial probity and accountability comes in the wake of scandals that have rocked public confidence and judicial esteem, viz., the Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam; the Rs. 15-lakh scandal involving a judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court; the demand to impeach Kolkata High Court judge Soumitra Sen; and compulsory retirement of several judicial officers in the subordinate judiciary in Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. With the rot so widespread, the sooner the Supreme Court sides with probity and public accountability, the better.
Having been in profession since the last 20 years,really fail to understand how and with which system the ability of a person is judged.
When persons of low background,low intellect and with political back ground are being elevated to the bench these types of happenings will go on and there will be no control of anyone over them.
There are several stories of such individuals which can easily be heard among the members of the Bar.
I congratulate Mr Kapil Sibbal Sr Advocate for his findings for the glory of the Bar and the legal system of our country.
From ‘Exclude judges from RTI Act’
CHENNAI: Declaration of assets by judges should be excluded from the purview of the Right to Information Act, Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan has said .He told media persons, after inaugurating a guest house of the Madras High Court here on Saturday, that the Act should not be made as a tool to harass the judges .
Failure or false declaration of assets by judges would be presumed to be a misconduct under the proposed law. Misconduct was one of the grounds for removal of a judge, he reminded .
Excerpts from ‘Half Of The Last 16 Chief Justices Were Corrupt’ – An Interview with Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan:
Q: what else is rotting in our judiciary It’s great judges have agreed to declare assets. But will it really help? Politicians do it too.
A: This decision is very welcome, even if it’s only happened under public pressure. It is proof of the power of public opinion. And even though declaring assets is a relatively minor aspect of judicial accountability, it will help. If a judge misdeclares his assets, there’s a chance someone might know he has particular properties he hasn’t declared, and may point it out. One could then examine if these can be explained within their legal income.
Q: The debate around judicial accountability has got really hot. Are there watershed events that triggered this?
A: Not in my own perception, but I think for the public there were two watershed events – the Chief Justice Sabharwal case (where there was an allegation that Chief Justice YS Sabharwal’s orders to demolish commercial outlets in Delhi directly benefited his sons, who were partners with some mall developers) and the Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam. Both these cases got wide media attention. A 2006 Transparency International report said the judiciary in India is the second most corrupt institution after the police.
Q: You’ve been at the forefront of the judicial accountability campaign. Why?
A: I have been witness to judicial corruption in the courts for a very long time. I know decisions are passed for extraneous considerations, but it’s difficult to get hard evidence of this. There have been highprofile impeachment attempts, for instance, on Justice Ramaswamy, Justice Punchi and Justice Anand. Yet, they all went on to become chief justices. In my view, out of the last 16 to 17 chief justices, half have been corrupt. I can’t prove this, though we had evidence against Punchi, Anand and Sabharwal on the basis of which we sought their impeachment.
Q: What is the root cause of judicial corruption then, and what are your key demands?
A: Our key demand is an institutional mechanism for entertaining complaints and taking action against the judiciary. Nothing exists today. Everyone realises impeachment is impractical. To move an impeachment motion you need the signatures of 100 MPS, but you can’t get them because many MPs have pending individual or party cases in these judges’ courts. In the impeachment proceeding against Justice Bhalla, the BJP declined to sign because LK Advani had been acquitted by him in the Babri Masjid demolition case. Such political considerations prevail all the time. An in-house procedure was set up in 1999, post a chief justices’ conference in 1997, but that too is activated only selectively. For example, the complaint against Justice Bhalla was that he had purchased land worth Rs 4 crore at Rs 4 lakh — approximately — from land mafia in Noida. This was based on a report from the DM and SSP of Noida. This land mafia had several cases pending in courts subordinate to Justice Bhalla. Another complaint was that in the Reliance Power matter, though his son was the lawyer for Reliance Power, Justice Bhalla constituted a special bench while he was the presiding judge in Lucknow. He sat in the house of one the judges at 11pm at night to hear their case and pass an injunction in their favour. We asked Chief Justice Sabharwal to initiate proceedings against Bhalla, but he refused.
Similarly, Justice Vijender Jain decided the case of a person whose granddaughter had been married out of his own house. He was a close friend but he still heard and decided the case in this person’s favour. The point is, in these cases though very specific complaints were made to the then Chief Justice of India (CJI), he didn’t do anything to activate the in-house procedure. All these judges have gone on to become chief justices. Bhalla is still chief justice of Rajasthan; Virendra Jain became chief justice of Punjab and Haryana.
…
Q: Are there other ways in which judicial corruption manifests itself?
A: There are so many. There is Justice Kapadia who decided on the Niyamgiri mining lease case in Orissa. He said Vedanta can’t be given the lease because it’s been blacklisted by the Norwegian government; but its subsidiary company Sterlite can get the lease because it is a publicly listed company. Justice Kapadia said it’s publicly listed because he had shares in it and yet he passed an order in favour of Sterlite! There is a law against judges hearing cases where there is a conflict of interest, but they just bypass it and you can’t complain because that would be contempt.
Excerpted from Tehelka Magazine, Vol 6, Issue 35, Dated September 05, 2009
” हर शाख पे उलà¥à¤²à¥‚ बैठा है ” nice article .. why not posting any article in hindi..?
I will refrain from making sweeping statements on the integrity of the highest chair of judiciary. To ask “how is the CJI’s family able to afford all the plots? – what if all the plots applied for had been alloted?” and then deduct that since Sheeba Sabhrawal, daughter-in-law of the former CJI YK Sabhrawal gets the plot is nexus is an inferential conculsion and fraught with possible judgemental errors.
Today even a common man applies for more than one government plots to take the chances in case it is a lottery based system. A CJI family can not be devoid of this right.
Rather than trying to getting the long list of allottees, I would try to find out the rules that were set for allotment of these plots and to find out whether there were any violation of these rules while allotment. This can point towards nexus because that is where mutual interest gets reflected.
An interview from any lawyer with the headlines like “Half Of The Last 16 Chief Justices Were Corrupt” has little meaning except for a fact that it creates sensation and breeds more cynicism. Lawyers themselves do not have very high rank in the scale of integrity. My personal belief is that ( Mind you – it is my personal belief) if half of chief justices were corrupt, almost all lawyers are in the same league. Now, such statements about lawyers have no meaning as they do not serve any purpose except creating a steriotype in my mind. Let us refrain from creating such steriotypes.
More on judicial corruption:
Former Union Law Minister Shanti Bhushan on Thursday told the Supreme Court that at least eight of the 16 chief justices of India (CJIs) were “definitely corrupt”.
…
Sixteen CJIs that Shanti Bhushan has mentioned in his affidavit are: Justice Rangnath Mishra, Justice K N Singh, Justice M H Kaina, Justice L M Sharma, Justice M N Venkatachalliah, Justice A M Ahemadi, Justice J S Verma, Justice M M Punchhi, Justice A S Anand, Justice S P Bharucha, Justice B N Kirpal, Justice G B Pathak, Justice Rajendra Babu, Justice R C Lohati, Justice V N Khare and Justice Y K Sabharwal.
Well, Bhushan was a law minister once, what did he do to curb the corruption? Now, suddenly he wants to be a known as warrior for transparency? That too for a person who has repeatedly defended terrorists accused in the bombing cases and people like Arundhati Roy? Great. I suspect he is bargaining for his son struck in contempt of court case. Eventually right bargain will be struck and it would be a win-win deal for every one.
sid,
look at the positive side.
let all corrupt persons higlight the corruption of the other.this way the system gets exposed to public view,and all the plastics smiles and v-signs get wiped out.
i wish that this process creeps to the very top and the great NG family is bared in full public view.
ashwani,
What we have is a tree of corruption, not one or two single disjointed corrupt people. Expecting that one or two branches can shake this tree is a dream that would never be fulfilled. The top people would be protected by the branches simply because top people are the roots that gave them protection and they want their children to inherit this branch role based on the approval from top. This is exactly like aristocracy – there is one royal family and group of aristocrats give it support and gain legitimacy in return (hint: look at the history of British royal family). Aristocrats sacrifice themselves to protect this aristocracy scheme (a recent example: when Volker report identified Indian National Congress as one of the beneficiaries of “Oil for Food” scam, Natwar Singh took the fall, it did not reach top brass). It does not matter if it is Digvijay Singh or Pramod Mahajan.
The very fact that people like Bhushan did not do anything against corruption when they have the power shows us how corruption is allowed to reach the very heart of our society. Today, even a teenager knows that people at the power gets more money than their salary by the extra-judicial means and therefore if he ever gets such power he would follow the same path. So if he becomes a part of treasury, he would not let go any file without his “regular”. If he becomes a bank clerk, he would tell you at the end of transaction (“sir hamko bhi kuchh milna chahiye”). If he becomes a traffic cop, he would demand his “per trip” from the truck drivers regardless of the fact that they are at fault or not. If people like Bhushan ever made examples out of few top officers, new generation would have known that there is a punishment for transgression. It did not happen, therefore we have a buffet of corruption.
From A scam reaches doorsteps of judiciary:
…
Thiruvananthapuram: Retired Supreme Court judge V R Krishna Iyer on Monday said a judicial panel should probe the alleged amassing of wealth by K G Balakrishnan, former chief justice of India and present chairman of the National Human Rights Commission.
Reacting to a Malayalam TV channel report that Balakrishnan’s son-in-law and Youth Congress leader advocate P V Sreenijan had accumulated property worth crores of rupees which is beyond his known source of income, Iyer said the allegations were an insult to the judiciary.
KGB wasn’t even qualified to be HC judge, say records
Advocate PA Chandran, a Dalit lawyer with a career track record of three decades in the Kerala High Court and founder of SC/ST lawyers’ organisation – the Lawyers Centre for Social Justice — provides compelling evidence to Firstpost investigative partner VK Shashikumar to claim that KG Balakrishnan’s appointment to the higher judiciary violated Article 217 of the Indian Constitution…
..The legal complication arising out of Balakrishnan’s rise is pegged to the constitutional provisions prescribing minimum qualifications to be a High Court judge. Balakrishnan held a position in the Subordinate Judicial Service, which consists exclusively of “persons intended to fill up the posts of district judges and other posts and other civil judicial posts inferior to the post of district judge.†(Article 233, Chapter VI)
According to Chandran, “when Balakrishnan was appointed to the Kerala High Court as judge he was at the most qualified to be a district judge.†Moreover, Article 217, Chapter V relating to qualification for appointment as High Court judge prescribes that the candidate should have held a judicial office for at least 10 years, or has been an advocate of the High Court for “at least 10 years.â€
Justice Balakrishnan’s career record shows that on both these counts his experience was inadequate.
From Lost SC berth for opposing HC judgeship for CJI Kabir’s sister: Guj CJ, Jul 12 2013:
Gujarat High Court Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya has complained that Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir — who retires on July 18 — blocked his elevation to the Supreme Court earlier this year because, as a member of the collegium of the Calcutta High Court, he had opposed the appointment of CJI Kabir’s lawyer sister to the Bench, a decision he said was tantamount to “rape†of the court.
…
In his letter to the CJI, accessed by The Indian Express, Chief Justice Bhattacharya wrote: “As a human being, I have a reasonable basis to apprehend that the fact that as a member of the collegium while I was a judge of the Calcutta HC, I raised serious objections against the elevation of Smt Shukla Kabir Sinha, your (CJI Altamas Kabir’s) younger sister, is the real reason for making such observations against me.â€
…
Justice Bhattacharya has also written, “When time came for selection of Smt Shukla Kabir Sinha as a Judge of the HC, I was pressured to agree to such a proposal as a member of the collegium, but I thought it would amount to committing rape of the Calcutta HC, which was like my mother and if I didn’t raise any objections that would amount to closing my eyes while my mother was being raped. As a result, I used rather strong words so that by looking at the nature of words used by me, the person responsible for sending such a recommendation would have a second thought… Unfortunately, I was unsuccessful in resisting the rape of my mother in spite of my earnest endeavour. However, at the time of my death, I will not repent that I ever compromised with wrong for the sake of my career.â€
Ex SC Judge and Current Chair of PCI, Justice Katju’s explosive revealation, How a corrupt judge continued in Madras high court by Markandey Katju, Jul 21, 2014:
…
There was an additional judge of the Madras high court against whom there were several allegations of corruption.
…But one acting chief justice of Madras high court by a single stroke of his pen deleted all those adverse entries…
…
That judge had the solid support of a very important political leader of Tamil Nadu. I was told that this was because while a district judge he had granted bail to that political leader.
Since I was getting many reports about his corruption, I requested the Chief Justice of India, Justice RC Lahoti, to get a secret IB inquiry made about him.
…
The CJI then came on the line and said that what I had complained about had been found true. Evidently the IB had found enough material about the judge’s corruption.
…
Since the two-year term as additional judge of that person was coming to an end, I assumed he would be discontinued as a judge of the high court in view of the IB report. However, what actually happened was that he got another one year’s appointment as an additional judge, …
…
The information I got was that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was at that time leaving for New York to attend the UN general assembly session. At the Delhi airport, he was told by ministers of the Tamil Nadu party that by the time he returned from New York his government would have fallen as their party would withdraw support to the UPA (for not continuing that additional judge).
…
On hearing this, Singh panicked, but he was told by a senior Congress minister not to worry, and that he would manage everything. That minister then went to Justice Lahoti and told him there would be a crisis if that additional judge was discontinued. On hearing this, Justice Lahoti sent a letter to the government of India to give another term of one year as additional judge to that corrupt judge,
…
The additional judge was later given another term as additional judge by the new CJI Justice Sabharwal, and then confirmed as a permanent judge by the next CJI Justice KG Balakrishnan, but transferred to another high court.
I have related all this to show how the system actually works, whatever it is in theory.
So sad and these are the guys Shri. Modi and Shri. Shah had to counter!!!
For the record: India’s Higher Judiciary Needs A Drastic Restructuring by Jay Bhattacharjee – March 16, 2016
Exceprts from Judicial Delays: ‘Tareek Pe Tareek’ And The Tryst With $5 Trillion GDP by Shankkar Aiyar, March 03 2021:
How bad is the pendency? Data from the Lok Sabha presents a shocking history. In 2002, over 2.58 crore cases were pending in courts. In 2012 the number touched 3.22 crore cases. In January 2021, over 4.28 crore cases are pending across India’s courts.
…
To get a sense of the state of delay and decay consider this one factoid. Over two-thirds of the country’s 4.78 lakh prisoners are under trial, yet to be convicted. In 2019, Gogoi, then the CJI, had observed there were over a thousand 50-year-old cases, two lakh 25-year-old cases. He revealed that even summons had not been issued in 20 lakh of the 90 lakh civil cases and one crore of the 2.10 crore criminal cases.
…
The quest to find the faultlines in the redressal mechanism has been unceasing. A Supreme Court directive led to the appointment of a task force for Judicial Impact Assessment which submitted two reports. The Department of Justice website lists over 30 reports which have been submitted and ten different studies commissioned to look into the various aspects of the judicial process and reforms.
…
India’s legal landscape is littered with laws; many of them so archaic that texts are unavailable for citizens to be informed of. As per India Code, there are 980 Central Acts – the oldest Bengal Indigo Contracts Act is dated 1936. The number of laws under state governments is at best a guesstimate.
…
Every factor of productivity—land, labour, and capital—is shackled by archaic laws. Indeed, the two-member committee on obsolete laws had to present ten reports.
Sad and depressing:
Prashant Bhushan is my friend, but I am disappointed that SC didn’t try him for contempt by Yogendra Yadav, 1 September, 2022 that looks into the strange decision by Supreme Court to drop a 13-year old contempt case against Prashant Bhushan.
A brief excerpt:
“The closing of this case means that some of the most explosive affidavits filed in the apex court would now remain unexamined, virtually sealed. It is shocking that these affidavits pertained to the alleged “corruption” of the top judges of the apex court. There is no other forum where these serious charges could be examined and adjudicated. Even that single forum has been closed now.
…
To refresh everyone’s memory: We are not talking here about the famous case involving Prashant Bhushan’s tweets regarding then-CJI S.A. Bobde’s motorbike. That case ended on the last day of Justice Arun Mishra’s tenure with a fine of Rs 1. During the same period, the Court had suddenly decided to reopen another old case of contempt of court against Bhushan. This involved his interview with Tehelka magazine in 2009 where he said, “In my view, out of the last 16 to 17 Chief Justices, half have been corrupt.” This is what led to a contempt of court case against Prashant Bhushan and Tarun Tejpal, then-editor of Tehelka.