Justice Jasti Chelameswar, who began his stint as a Supreme Court
judge in October 2011, has retired today.
He has been a part of some crucial benches, delivered significant judgments and was also involved in various controversies.
Labelled as the "chief dissenter " by many, Justice Chelameswar had led three fellow judges to allege that the "situation in the Supreme Court is not in order". He also delivered important judgments on civil liberties, right to freedom of speech and recently paved the way of a nine-judge bench to declare privacy to be a fundamental right.
IT Act, AADHAAR AND PRIVACY
Justice Chelameswar was a part of the two-judge bench that struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act. The bench deemed it as unconstitutional and violative of the fundamental right to free speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution.
"What may be offensive to one may not be offensive to another. What may cause annoyance or inconvenience to one may not cause annoyance or inconvenience to another," the judgment by him and Justice Rohington Fali Nariman had said.
He also headed a Supreme Court bench that raised the issue of privacy being a fundamental right in the context of Aadhaar. Justice Chelameswar was a part of the bench that declared Aadhaar is not mandatory to avail government subsidies and other services
LONE DISSENTING VOICE
To change the existing collegium system of appointment of judges the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) Act was passed in 2014. Through this Act, the government and the opposition would also have a say in the appointment of judges. The Act was brought in to ensure the judiciary doesn't have a final say in the appointment of judges. However, the Act was deemed unconstitutional by SC's five-judge bench in 2015.
In a vote of 4:1, Chelameswar was the only one to speak against the existing collegium system which according to him was "opaque and inaccessible both to public and history, barring occasional leaks".
He supported the NJAC Act stating that transparency was important for constitutional governance.
"To hold that it (the government) should be totally excluded from the process of appointing judges would be wholly illogical and inconsistent with the foundations of the theory of democracy and a doctrinal heresy," he said.
Sticking to his ground, he declared later on declared that he would be boycotting meetings of the collegium. During the tenure of former CJIs TS Thakur and JS Khehar, he had demanded that the functioning of the collegium be made public. His efforts paid off, when in 2017, the Supreme Court decided to publish collegiums resolutions on judicial appointments on its website.
HEAD ON WITH CJI
In 2017, the Supreme Court struck down an order by a two-judge bench in a case of judicial corruption involving Prasad Insitute of Medical Sciences.
There were allegations of bribe being paid to judges so Justice Chelameswar ordered that a Constitution Bench be formed for hearing the petition seeking SIT probe in the case.
When Justice Chelameswar was about to pass the order, he received another draft order which was reportedly issued by CJI Dipak Misra. He had listed the same matter in another court. After interpreting the draft order, Chelameswar cited Article 145 (3) observing that the matter relating to the SIT probe can be heard by a constitution bench without the CJI passing a specific order.
He came in direct confrontation with the CJI. The CJI later set up seven-judge bench to hear the order passed by Justice Chelameswar bench in the matter of SIT probe. While two of the judges excused themselves, the five-judge bench annulled the order passed by Justice Chelameswar.
NOT ALL WELL IN SC
In an unprecedented move, four senior judges addressed a press conference on January 12, expressing their displeasure over they way certain cases were being assigned selectively to benches of "preferences".
Justice Ranjan
Gogoi, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph accompanied Justice Chelameswar
and the press conference took place at his residence in New Delhi.
"There have been instances where cases having far-reaching consequences for the nation and the institution had been assigned by the Chief Justice of this Court selectively to the Benches "of their preferences" without any rational basis for such assignment," read the letter the four judges wrote to the CJI.
This was not the first time the apex court judge voiced his dissent
During Justice Chelameswar's seven-year term in the Supreme Court he has given a dissenting judgment on various occasions.
LAST DAY AT SC
The 65-year-old judge had earlier planned on skipping the custom and practice of the Supreme Court- sharing a bench with the Chief Justice of India on his last working day. But keeping with a long-standing tradition of the Court, Justice Chelameswar sat with the CJI at Court No. 1 today.
Former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan paid a heartfelt tribute to Justice Jasti Chelameswar on Thursday, the second last day of his judicial work.
Bhushan hailed Chelameswar's "courage, conduct, judicial approach and uprightness" and went on to list him as one of the greatest judges the Court has produced. The retiring Justice, moved by the tribute, thanked the members of the Bar and apologised for being harsh on the Bar at times.
But that was it. Justice Chelameswar is clear that he wants his retirement to be a "private affair" and hence has refused to attend his farewell given by Supreme Court's bar association.
He has been a part of some crucial benches, delivered significant judgments and was also involved in various controversies.
Labelled as the "chief dissenter " by many, Justice Chelameswar had led three fellow judges to allege that the "situation in the Supreme Court is not in order". He also delivered important judgments on civil liberties, right to freedom of speech and recently paved the way of a nine-judge bench to declare privacy to be a fundamental right.
IT Act, AADHAAR AND PRIVACY
Justice Chelameswar was a part of the two-judge bench that struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act. The bench deemed it as unconstitutional and violative of the fundamental right to free speech and expression under Article 19 of the Constitution.
"What may be offensive to one may not be offensive to another. What may cause annoyance or inconvenience to one may not cause annoyance or inconvenience to another," the judgment by him and Justice Rohington Fali Nariman had said.
He also headed a Supreme Court bench that raised the issue of privacy being a fundamental right in the context of Aadhaar. Justice Chelameswar was a part of the bench that declared Aadhaar is not mandatory to avail government subsidies and other services
LONE DISSENTING VOICE
To change the existing collegium system of appointment of judges the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) Act was passed in 2014. Through this Act, the government and the opposition would also have a say in the appointment of judges. The Act was brought in to ensure the judiciary doesn't have a final say in the appointment of judges. However, the Act was deemed unconstitutional by SC's five-judge bench in 2015.
In a vote of 4:1, Chelameswar was the only one to speak against the existing collegium system which according to him was "opaque and inaccessible both to public and history, barring occasional leaks".
He supported the NJAC Act stating that transparency was important for constitutional governance.
"To hold that it (the government) should be totally excluded from the process of appointing judges would be wholly illogical and inconsistent with the foundations of the theory of democracy and a doctrinal heresy," he said.
Sticking to his ground, he declared later on declared that he would be boycotting meetings of the collegium. During the tenure of former CJIs TS Thakur and JS Khehar, he had demanded that the functioning of the collegium be made public. His efforts paid off, when in 2017, the Supreme Court decided to publish collegiums resolutions on judicial appointments on its website.
HEAD ON WITH CJI
In 2017, the Supreme Court struck down an order by a two-judge bench in a case of judicial corruption involving Prasad Insitute of Medical Sciences.
There were allegations of bribe being paid to judges so Justice Chelameswar ordered that a Constitution Bench be formed for hearing the petition seeking SIT probe in the case.
When Justice Chelameswar was about to pass the order, he received another draft order which was reportedly issued by CJI Dipak Misra. He had listed the same matter in another court. After interpreting the draft order, Chelameswar cited Article 145 (3) observing that the matter relating to the SIT probe can be heard by a constitution bench without the CJI passing a specific order.
He came in direct confrontation with the CJI. The CJI later set up seven-judge bench to hear the order passed by Justice Chelameswar bench in the matter of SIT probe. While two of the judges excused themselves, the five-judge bench annulled the order passed by Justice Chelameswar.
NOT ALL WELL IN SC
In an unprecedented move, four senior judges addressed a press conference on January 12, expressing their displeasure over they way certain cases were being assigned selectively to benches of "preferences".
"There have been instances where cases having far-reaching consequences for the nation and the institution had been assigned by the Chief Justice of this Court selectively to the Benches "of their preferences" without any rational basis for such assignment," read the letter the four judges wrote to the CJI.
This was not the first time the apex court judge voiced his dissent
During Justice Chelameswar's seven-year term in the Supreme Court he has given a dissenting judgment on various occasions.
LAST DAY AT SC
The 65-year-old judge had earlier planned on skipping the custom and practice of the Supreme Court- sharing a bench with the Chief Justice of India on his last working day. But keeping with a long-standing tradition of the Court, Justice Chelameswar sat with the CJI at Court No. 1 today.
Former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan paid a heartfelt tribute to Justice Jasti Chelameswar on Thursday, the second last day of his judicial work.
Bhushan hailed Chelameswar's "courage, conduct, judicial approach and uprightness" and went on to list him as one of the greatest judges the Court has produced. The retiring Justice, moved by the tribute, thanked the members of the Bar and apologised for being harsh on the Bar at times.
But that was it. Justice Chelameswar is clear that he wants his retirement to be a "private affair" and hence has refused to attend his farewell given by Supreme Court's bar association.
No comments:
Post a Comment