As “The Strange Case of Justice P.D. Dinakaran” gets caught up in the usual Indian whirligig of caste, politics, nepotism and all the rest, Supreme Court lawyer Rajeev Dhavan goes for the jugular in the Delhi tabloid Mail Today:
“If Justice Dinakaran is not fit to be a Supreme Court judge, why is he fit to be a High Court judge? Did the collegium slip up when they made him chief justice of Karnataka? Or, indeed, when he was appointed a judge?…
“Justice Dinakaran’s declaration: ‘I’m wealthy, I don’t need to be corrupt,’ is not sufficient. I once asked a rich uncle: ‘What does one give to the man who has everything?’ The rich birthday-boy replied: ‘A little more of everything’.
“Theoretically being rich is not a defence for bad financial behaviour. Justice Dinakaran has a case to answer on disproportionate assets in violation of the law and suspect decision making….
“Justice Dinakaran has declared that he will not accompany the ‘judges exchange’ delegation to Australia. There is a lot to doubt whethere he deserved to be a delegate over others in the first place. Someone seems to have a soft spot for him. But the process of his appointment needs scrutiny.
“Under the Supreme Court’s dispensation the collegium (at present CJI K.G. Balakrishnan, Justices B.N. Agarwal, S. Kapadia, Tarun Chatterjee and A.Kabir) decides. In addition, the collegium should know the views of other SC judges who had knowledge of the judge—in this Markandey Katju and Ganguly who had been chief justices of Madras, and Cyriac Joseph and Ravindran who had been at Karnataka. Rumour has it that full consultation did not take place with these judges.”
Cartoon: courtesy Prasad Radhakrishnan/ Mail Today
Visit the Mail Today website: www.mailtoday.in
Also read: The strange case of Justice P.D. Dinakaran
Fali Nariman interview in the Indian Express