Express News Service
NEW DELHI: Chief Justice of India N V Ramana in his farewell speech on Friday, while underscoring on “litigants” being focal points of any delivery system, said that the need of the hour was the Indianisation of our legal system. Stressing on the legal system being colonial in nature, he advocated for adoption of practical realities of our society and localising the justice delivery system.
“In the last 75 years, our jurisprudence has evolved considerably. Our judiciary is not defined by a single order or decision. Yes, at times, it fell short of peoples’ expectations. But most of the times, it has championed the cause of the people. It was widely predicted that with A.K. Gopalan, the due process of law was history. But, this Court, in the case of Maneka Gandhi restored what was taken away earlier.”
“Similarly, ADM Jabalpur was seen as a death knell on personal liberty. Subsequently, the error stood rectified by a 9-Judges Bench in K. S. Puttaswamy. This institution never hesitated to remedy itself. Your hope upon the institution cannot be so weak that it is shattered with one perceived unfair judgment,” he said.
He also said that his constant endeavour was to make people aware of their rights and obligations as well as their Constitutional schemes, democratic values and institutions.
Ramana, who retired on August 26 after serving a tenure of over 16 months as the 48th CJI, tried to strengthen the institution and further the goal of justice with the help of his collegium judges and consulting judges by appointing 11 judges to the SC and 224 judges in the HCs.
CJI also said that coordinated efforts from the government and bar and bench were needed to revamp the judicial system as no systematic assessment had taken place since Independence.
“The issues faced by the judiciary cannot be looked at in isolation. The judiciary is independent when it comes to adjudication of cases, but with respect to finances or appointments, it is still dependent on the government. To coordinate and to get cooperation from the Government, interaction is inevitable. But interaction does not mean influence,” Ramana said.
The 48th CJI, who had succeeded S A Bobde on April 24, 2021, spoke at two events on his last day in office and expressed regret for not being able to pay much attention to issues of listing and posting matters for hearing in the Supreme Court.
Addressing one function organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) to bid him adieu on completion of his over 16-month-long tenure on Friday evening, the CJI observed the judiciary has “fallen short of people’s expectations” at times.
The jurisprudence has evolved considerably in the last 75 years, and “our judiciary is not defined by a single order or decision. Most of the time, it has championed the cause of the people”, he said.
Justice Ramana thanked his colleagues in the collegiums and consulting judges for being able to recommend so many names for judgeships.
“I am happy to inform you that thanks to my collegium judges and consulting judges, in the last 16 months, we could appoint 11 judges to the apex court, and out of the 255 recommended for the various high courts, 224 judges are already appointed.
“This amounts to nearly 20 per cent of the total sanctioned strength of the high courts. Due to our concerted efforts, we could make considerable progress in appointing more women judges and promoting social diversity on the bench. We got 15 new chief justices for various high courts during the same period. This process is a reflection of the coherence and determination of the judges to strengthen our institution, to further the goal of justice,” the CJI said.
CJI-designate U U Lalit hailed his predecessor and pointed out two “stand out” achievements, including that over 250 appointments of judges in the high courts across the country as a result of recommendations made by the apex court collegium in the last about 14 months or so.
Attorney General K K Venugopal, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Dushyant Dave and Vikas Singh paid glowing tributes to the CJI for his contribution to the judiciary.
Dave broke into tears in the forenoon while bidding adieu to the CJI who was sitting with justices Lalit and Hima Kohli.
He said Justice Ramana maintained checks and balances between the judiciary, executive and Parliament, and did so “with a spine” and described him a citizen’s judge.
Recently, senior advocate and former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Dushyant Dave had said that the CJI should not have the power to assign and list cases, and a fully automated system for allocation be put in place in the top court.
“We have to admit the fact that the pendency is a huge challenge before us. I must admit that issues of listing and posting of matters is one of the areas on which I could not pay much attention. I am sorry for that,” the CJI said in the forenoon, adding, “We are busy in fire-fighting on all days.”
Justice Ramana, who served as a judge for over two decades in the higher judiciary, expressed satisfaction over his journey and said that he never claimed himself to be a “scholarly judge or a great judge”, but always believed that the ultimate purpose of the justice delivery system is to provide justice to the common man.
On his retirement day, the CJI hinted toward the malicious campaign aimed at him and his family also just before his elevation to the top post.
“From the date, I joined the bench till I reached the highest possible position in the judiciary, I was subjected to conspiratorial scrutiny. My family and I suffered in silence. But ultimately, the truth will always prevail. ‘Satyameva Jayate’,” he said.
The CJI said the Indian judiciary has grown with time and it cannot be defined or judged by one single order or judgement.
He said unless the credibility of the institution is protected, being the officers of this court, one could not command respect from the people and the society.
The CJI referred to the packed auditorium and the good words spoken about him by Justice Lalit and other bar leaders and said that he was searching for words to adequately express his gratitude.
He said the problems faced by the judiciary cannot be looked at in isolation.
“The judiciary is independent when it comes to adjudication of cases, but with respect to finances or appointments, it is still dependent on the government. To coordinate and get cooperation from the government, interaction is inevitable. But interaction does not mean influence. I hope this dialogue between the judiciary and the public will continue,” he said.
He told the audience about the idea behind his weekend travels to the courts across the country and said, “I felt it was my constitutional duty to dispel these notions and bring the court closer to the people, by way of generating awareness and building confidence among people about the judiciary.”
“I am demitting my office with utmost contentment. When you ultimately judge me as a judge, I would like to say that I may be judged as a very ordinary judge, but one who greatly relished and enjoyed the job,” he said.
Election freebies: SC refers 2013 judgment to a three-judge bench
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday asked the three-judge bench to consider whether its 2013 judgment which held that promises of freebies is not an electoral offence or corrupt practice needs to be overruled or not.
SC’s 2013 judgment which the bench of CJI NV Ramana, Justices Hima Kohli and CT Ravikumar asked a new 3 judge bench to consider also held that the State distributes freebies in the form of colour TVs, laptops, mixer-grinders etc. to eligible and deserving persons was directly related to directive principles of the State Policy.
Court also opined that there were some issues which required an extensive hearing before passing any concrete orders. The issues which were flagged by the bench related to the scope of judicial intervention with respect to ban of freebies and whether the appointment of an expert commission to put forth suggestions on the issue would serve any purpose.
“Freebies may create a situation wherein the State Government cannot provide basic amenities due to lack of funds and the State is pushed towards imminent bankruptcy. In the same breath, we should remember that such freebies are extended utilizing taxpayers’ money only for increasing the popularity of the party and electoral prospects,” the bench said.
(With PTI Inputs)
NEW DELHI: Chief Justice of India N V Ramana in his farewell speech on Friday, while underscoring on “litigants” being focal points of any delivery system, said that the need of the hour was the Indianisation of our legal system. Stressing on the legal system being colonial in nature, he advocated for adoption of practical realities of our society and localising the justice delivery system.
“In the last 75 years, our jurisprudence has evolved considerably. Our judiciary is not defined by a single order or decision. Yes, at times, it fell short of peoples’ expectations. But most of the times, it has championed the cause of the people. It was widely predicted that with A.K. Gopalan, the due process of law was history. But, this Court, in the case of Maneka Gandhi restored what was taken away earlier.”
“Similarly, ADM Jabalpur was seen as a death knell on personal liberty. Subsequently, the error stood rectified by a 9-Judges Bench in K. S. Puttaswamy. This institution never hesitated to remedy itself. Your hope upon the institution cannot be so weak that it is shattered with one perceived unfair judgment,” he said.
He also said that his constant endeavour was to make people aware of their rights and obligations as well as their Constitutional schemes, democratic values and institutions.
Ramana, who retired on August 26 after serving a tenure of over 16 months as the 48th CJI, tried to strengthen the institution and further the goal of justice with the help of his collegium judges and consulting judges by appointing 11 judges to the SC and 224 judges in the HCs.
CJI also said that coordinated efforts from the government and bar and bench were needed to revamp the judicial system as no systematic assessment had taken place since Independence.
“The issues faced by the judiciary cannot be looked at in isolation. The judiciary is independent when it comes to adjudication of cases, but with respect to finances or appointments, it is still dependent on the government. To coordinate and to get cooperation from the Government, interaction is inevitable. But interaction does not mean influence,” Ramana said.
The 48th CJI, who had succeeded S A Bobde on April 24, 2021, spoke at two events on his last day in office and expressed regret for not being able to pay much attention to issues of listing and posting matters for hearing in the Supreme Court.
Addressing one function organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) to bid him adieu on completion of his over 16-month-long tenure on Friday evening, the CJI observed the judiciary has “fallen short of people’s expectations” at times.
The jurisprudence has evolved considerably in the last 75 years, and “our judiciary is not defined by a single order or decision. Most of the time, it has championed the cause of the people”, he said.
Justice Ramana thanked his colleagues in the collegiums and consulting judges for being able to recommend so many names for judgeships.
“I am happy to inform you that thanks to my collegium judges and consulting judges, in the last 16 months, we could appoint 11 judges to the apex court, and out of the 255 recommended for the various high courts, 224 judges are already appointed.
“This amounts to nearly 20 per cent of the total sanctioned strength of the high courts. Due to our concerted efforts, we could make considerable progress in appointing more women judges and promoting social diversity on the bench. We got 15 new chief justices for various high courts during the same period. This process is a reflection of the coherence and determination of the judges to strengthen our institution, to further the goal of justice,” the CJI said.
CJI-designate U U Lalit hailed his predecessor and pointed out two “stand out” achievements, including that over 250 appointments of judges in the high courts across the country as a result of recommendations made by the apex court collegium in the last about 14 months or so.
Attorney General K K Venugopal, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Dushyant Dave and Vikas Singh paid glowing tributes to the CJI for his contribution to the judiciary.
Dave broke into tears in the forenoon while bidding adieu to the CJI who was sitting with justices Lalit and Hima Kohli.
He said Justice Ramana maintained checks and balances between the judiciary, executive and Parliament, and did so “with a spine” and described him a citizen’s judge.
Recently, senior advocate and former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Dushyant Dave had said that the CJI should not have the power to assign and list cases, and a fully automated system for allocation be put in place in the top court.
“We have to admit the fact that the pendency is a huge challenge before us. I must admit that issues of listing and posting of matters is one of the areas on which I could not pay much attention. I am sorry for that,” the CJI said in the forenoon, adding, “We are busy in fire-fighting on all days.”
Justice Ramana, who served as a judge for over two decades in the higher judiciary, expressed satisfaction over his journey and said that he never claimed himself to be a “scholarly judge or a great judge”, but always believed that the ultimate purpose of the justice delivery system is to provide justice to the common man.
On his retirement day, the CJI hinted toward the malicious campaign aimed at him and his family also just before his elevation to the top post.
“From the date, I joined the bench till I reached the highest possible position in the judiciary, I was subjected to conspiratorial scrutiny. My family and I suffered in silence. But ultimately, the truth will always prevail. ‘Satyameva Jayate’,” he said.
The CJI said the Indian judiciary has grown with time and it cannot be defined or judged by one single order or judgement.
He said unless the credibility of the institution is protected, being the officers of this court, one could not command respect from the people and the society.
The CJI referred to the packed auditorium and the good words spoken about him by Justice Lalit and other bar leaders and said that he was searching for words to adequately express his gratitude.
He said the problems faced by the judiciary cannot be looked at in isolation.
“The judiciary is independent when it comes to adjudication of cases, but with respect to finances or appointments, it is still dependent on the government. To coordinate and get cooperation from the government, interaction is inevitable. But interaction does not mean influence. I hope this dialogue between the judiciary and the public will continue,” he said.
He told the audience about the idea behind his weekend travels to the courts across the country and said, “I felt it was my constitutional duty to dispel these notions and bring the court closer to the people, by way of generating awareness and building confidence among people about the judiciary.”
“I am demitting my office with utmost contentment. When you ultimately judge me as a judge, I would like to say that I may be judged as a very ordinary judge, but one who greatly relished and enjoyed the job,” he said.
Election freebies: SC refers 2013 judgment to a three-judge bench
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday asked the three-judge bench to consider whether its 2013 judgment which held that promises of freebies is not an electoral offence or corrupt practice needs to be overruled or not.
SC’s 2013 judgment which the bench of CJI NV Ramana, Justices Hima Kohli and CT Ravikumar asked a new 3 judge bench to consider also held that the State distributes freebies in the form of colour TVs, laptops, mixer-grinders etc. to eligible and deserving persons was directly related to directive principles of the State Policy.
Court also opined that there were some issues which required an extensive hearing before passing any concrete orders. The issues which were flagged by the bench related to the scope of judicial intervention with respect to ban of freebies and whether the appointment of an expert commission to put forth suggestions on the issue would serve any purpose.
“Freebies may create a situation wherein the State Government cannot provide basic amenities due to lack of funds and the State is pushed towards imminent bankruptcy. In the same breath, we should remember that such freebies are extended utilizing taxpayers’ money only for increasing the popularity of the party and electoral prospects,” the bench said.
(With PTI Inputs)
