It is stated that "numerous legal practitioners in the Supreme Court raised their eyebrows" because of this. (2) It is stated at para 14 that the case was "Unprecedentedly taken away/diverted from the court of one Honble Judge who dealt with the case more than anybody else. This was with respect to the order passed on by this Court while dealing with the appeal. (1) "The allegation in this case was irrelevant and uncalled for as the truth was far from the spirit of the highly biased observation." (underlined for emphasis) At this juncture it is also necessary to refer to some other parts of the "affidavit part-I (reply)" filed by the contemnor which are per se contemptuous. The said statement was felt to be contemptuous by this Court and the contemnor was put to notice as to why action shall not be taken for making the statement. In the show cause reply the contemnor made allegations against numerous judicial officers (Judges), stating that they are as immoral, inefficient, incompetent and bribe-takers. At this juncture it is relevant to note that the name of respondent no.4 was deleted at the request of the appellant. "In the application reference was made to some parts of the letter purportedly written by respondent no.4. By order dated, it was observed as follows: Therefore, by order dated the matter was adjourned granting the contemnor opportunity to appear and file further reply/affidavit if he wanted to do so.ĥ. Even though the contemnor wanted to withdraw the IA and tender regrets, it was not considered desirable to accept the prayer. Certain statements in the reply were found to be more contemptuous, particularly para 4 thereof. Finding this statement in the IA to be contemptuous, notice was issued to the contemnor to show cause as to why proceedings for contempt shall not be initiated.
Some portion of the letter forms part of the petition. The letter purported to have been written by one Sharmista Das to the President of India was annexed to the petition. The apparent course for the tirade, as appears from the petition itself is an order dated in SLP No.6751 of 2004. "That a dispassionate study without harbouring any pre-conceived motion of water-tight evidences, under possession, will prove beyond doubt how incapable, corrupt and worthless is the present Chief Justice of the Supreme Court." (emphasis supplied)Ĥ.
Reference was made to a letter purported to have been written by respondent No.4 and sent to the President of India praying for removal of the then Chief Justice of India for his proved incapacity, misbehaviour and for appointment of Mr. 7948 of 2004 - it was noted that the contemnor had filed an application styled as "I.A for interim directions" purported with a prayer to initiate contempt proceedings against respondent No.4-Smt. Judge bashing is not and cannot be a substitute for constructive criticism.ģ. Judiciary should not be reduced to the position of flies in the hands of wanton boys. That cannot be permitted to be undermined because that will be against the public interest.Ģ. Its strength is the faith and confidence of the people in that institution. These statements tend to scandalize and lower the authority of the Courts and can not be permitted because, for functioning of democracy, an independent judiciary to dispense justice without fear and favour is paramount. "Judge bashing" and using derogatory and contemptuous language against Judges has become a favourite pastime of some people.
0 kommentar(er)
