Editorial

Yet Another Judicial Disaster

We now for the first time in Indian judicial history have a recommendation from the Chief Justice of India to the Prime Minister that a sitting judge of the Calcutta High Court be impeached. The only other impeachment was that of Justice V Ramaswami, under very different circumstances. That was exposure initiated by civil society, this is a move initiated by the Chief Justice of India. The former motion was defeated as the government of the day supported the motion but voted against it. This is likely to succeed as it is being initiated by the Government. While an impeachment is awaited, the case throws up some very interesting questions. A three-judge panel set up by the Chief Justice of India seems to have come to the conclusion that while he was practising as a lawyer, he was appointed Court Receiver in some pending litigation and was in that capacity entrusted with some money. It appears that the allegation is that he misappropriated that money to personal use. This happened between 1993 and 1995. He was appointed judge December 2003. The immediate questions arise; How come his antecedents were not checked prior to his appointment? What was the nature of the enquiries made before his appointment? Why were the facts about the money in the receivers account not known to the appointing authorities or was it known and ignored? These matters are within the general knowledge of the bench and the bar. Obviously, the appointment as receiver was by judicial order. There too there is a problem. Is it right to appoint lawyers receivers? Is there not a conflict of interest somewhere? Should there not be some monitoring of lawyers appointed by courts to committees? Is it right for courts to appoint committees of private lawyers and individuals to carry out essential judicial functions? Perhaps the proposed impeachment will not answer these questions. However, the impeachment will set a precedent and hopefully act as a deterrent to Judges in future. Judged by the standard to which Justice Sen is being held, many would fall. The case of the delivery of cash to a Judge in Chandigarh is too fresh in our minds. Scams about housing deals are also much reported. The latest PF scandal is awaiting judicial determination for want of judges to hear the case. Judicial corruption, alas, in not news anymore. However one hopes that the move to impeach sends a signal which will be heard loud and clear. As at present, Justice Sen has refused to resign, which means he is ready to face impeachment. We have not heard his side of the story and hence it is too soon to comment on the possible outcome, but one thing is clear, the required number of MPs will sign up for the impeachment, as it is a move initiated by the government in power. Of course the procedure is long drawn out. There will be an enquiry under the Judges Enquiry Act and under Article 124( 4) of the Constitution of India, after which the motion will be put to vote. We still do not have a law under which the complaints can be entertained. The Chief Justice is resisting such a law, on the ground that the internal complaints committee is sufficient to meet the need of judicial accountability. Now the Chief Justice has set out to prove his point. The battle for accountability cannot end with the impeachment of Justice Sen. There is a lack of political will to prosecute judges for corruption. The prosecution of Justice Sumeet Mukerjee of the Delhi High Court is still caught up in procedural delays, leading to the impression that there is a lack of will to bring judges to account. A vigilant civil society and a free press seem to be our present mechanisms of accountability. We need to use the right to information more often, again something the judiciary has resisted.