The case involving the Madras High Court judge who reportedly received a call from a Union minister on granting anticipatory bail to two persons is remarkable for the u-turn it has taken—or has been forced to take.
On June 29, the judge R. Reghupathy, without naming anyone, said a Union minister tried to influence him to pass orders favouring the petitioners. According to this report, in which the reporter also mentions an off-the-record briefing by the judge after court, the minister is categorically reported to have spoken to the judge: “A Union minister talked to me. He influenced me to release this petitioner on anticipatory bail.”
The disclosure saw the usual to-and-fro from the political parties, with the BJP and Left united in their condemnation. Although the judge had not named the minister who talked to him, the BJP’s Arun Jaitley demanded that he be sacked.”The minister is not ‘a raja’ who was not accountable to anyone,” Jaitley, a Supreme Court advocate said, in a thinly disguised attempt to name the minister.
Kapil Sibal, a former Supreme Court lawyer now a serving cabinet minister, joined former atttorney general Soli J. Sorabjee, in demanding that the judge make the name public.
After the AIADMK leader J. Jayalalitha named A. Raja as the minister who spoke to the judge, the DMK chief M. Karunanidhi sought a clarification from the telecommunications minister. Meanwhile, MDMK chief Vaiko, an electoral ally of Jayalalitha, has suggested that Raja could have used another minister to pressure the judge. (The film star-turned-politician-turned Union minister D. Napoleon hails from the same area as Raja.)
A day after the incident became public, the chief justice of India, K.G. Balakrishnan, said “if the Minister had spoken to the Judge [as stated by him] then really it is an interference with judiciary.” Now, in an extraordinary turnaround, Justice Balakrishnan has said the judge did not really talk to the minister and that the counsel of the petitioners had held out a phone.
Clearly, there has been some hectic backpedalling. Who do you think is telling the truth?
Tags: A. Raja, AIADMK, Arun Jaitley, Chief Justice of India, Churumuri, CJI, D. Napoleon, DMK, J. Jayalalitha, J. Jayalalithaa, K.G. Balakrishnan, Kapil Sibal, M. Karunanidhi, MDMK, R. Reghupathy, Sans Serif, Soli J. Sorabjee, Supreme Court of India
7 July 2009 at 7:10 am
http://praja.in/blog/tarlesubba/2009/07/06/right-recall
7 July 2009 at 7:11 am
please see this
http://praja.in/blog/tarlesubba/2009/07/06/right-recall
7 July 2009 at 9:49 am
Given the cess pit of politicians in this fracas, you are lucky if you get half-truths. White lies are what you ought to expect, irrespective of their stripe..
7 July 2009 at 11:19 am
From a news story on CJI said, this much is clear: That lawyer met the
Judge and told him to speak on his mobile saying the Minister was on the
line wanting to speak to Judge.. the Judge says no to speakng with Minister and later bares its all in thw Court
So, Minister is per see not guilty of talking to the Minister – because the chat dint technically happen – but Minister is sure guilty like hell as he called and and all set to “advise” or “request” the minister !
Its like attempt to murder..
7 July 2009 at 11:41 am
Nobody is a saint.
Politicians want to be in control all the time.
Judges don’t want to be accountable to anybody.
Police want a free run so that they can do what they please.
Bureaucrats do everything to delay processes and make money in the bargain.
Aam admi wants to evade taxes, break traffic rules, bribe any and every official to get their job done.
7 July 2009 at 10:32 pm
Verify the calls received by the Hon judge Raghupathy from the service provider & Let the Law take its turn.
8 July 2009 at 8:22 am
When the judge complained the onus of verifying and proving or disproving the fact should have fallen on the government. Instead it seems like the buck is being passed back to the judge. Like Andy mentions, even if there was an attempt to influence the minister should be censured. If this is the fate of a judge, one can imagine the plight of the common man if at all he decides to raise his voice. We can bid goodbye to vigilant citizens or whistleblowers.
8 July 2009 at 12:54 pm
Why is passing the buck still happenning? why is not anybody held responsible for this act….. abviously UPA is going put this under the carpet… and the media will coolly (intentionally) forget this…..
18 July 2009 at 7:30 pm
There should be reservation for Judges, especially SC/ST