014 Independence of Indian Courts and Judges appear to be at peril owing to Temptations before Judges

TODAY'S untrivia:

THE TELUGU PROVERB 'KUNJARA YUDHAMBU DOMA KUTTUKA JOCCEN', approx. Engl. equivalent 'A herd of Elephants entered into the throat of a mosquito', seems to apply to Retd. Supreme Court CJI.

1. Recommendation of 1st Law Commission, 14th Report, as explained by Late M.C. Setalvad, one of Constitution Drafters, 1st Attorney General , Chairman 1st Law Commission, 1st Chairman, Bar Council of India: '....The Commission had, after careful consideration expressed the unanimous view that the practice of Judges looking forward to or accepting employment under the Government after retirement was undesirable as it could affect the independence of the Judiciary. We therefore recommended that a constitutional bar should be imposed on Judges accepting office under the Union or State Governments similar to the bar in the case of the Auditor and Comptroller-General and members of Public Service Commissions. ...'

   
   


2. 
   [ybmad contg.:] On advice of GOVERNMENT OF INDIA , the President has nominated Retd. Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi as Member of Rajya Sabha. Readers may recall that Jus. Gogoi retired as CJI only on 17.11.2019 , i.e. not even six months. Jus. Gogoi getting some Appointment/Position from the Government is not altogether unexpected . On the other hand, something larger than a simple Membership of Rajya Sabha , has been expected . Of course, now, a place in Central Cabinet on the basis of Rajya Sabha Membership may be an icing on the cake.


3. 
   ybmad: I am not sure, whether President Shri Ramnath Kovind, an eminent Lawyer himself, has taken into consideration the views of 1st Law Commission 14th Report, and one of Constituion Drafters M.V. Setalvad's suggestion. Though, the President may be under a Constitutional obligation to honor the Recommendation of the Council of Ministers, Presidents have an option of sending the Nomination proposal back to the Cabinet for reconsideration in the light of the 1st Law Commission's Advice.


4. 
   
   ybmad contg.: First of all, Retired Chief Justices of Supreme Court accepting an appointment from Government , should be looked at with suspicion, particularly when an Offer is made within short time of retirement . In case of Jus. Ranjan Gogoi, the gap is hardly six months.


5. 
   ybmad contg.: This is not the first time a Retired Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court Judge has received a post-retirement benefit . In fact , one member of the 1st Law Commission which has recommended a bar on post-retirement appointments for Judges, --Late Justice M.C. Chagla, retired Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court , was soon after his retirement appointed as Ambassador to U.S.A. Of course, there might have been some special reasons for the First Prime Minister of India, Late Jawahar Lal Nehru , to choose a Retired Justice as an Ambassador to U.S.A. The political/legal/social/international conditions of India of 1958 were definitely different from the political/legal/social/international conditions of 2020. In 1958, literacy level in India was very low and there were very few English Orators. I perceive that Jawahar Lal Nehru had special fixation/obsession for Orators, as can be seen from his choosing Late Krishna Menon as Defence Minister of India .


6. 
   ybmad contg.: Besides , Jawahar Lal Nehru might have thought that India needed an English oriented Jurist to represent India's arguments about Kashmir before American Presidents. Scarcity of Exceptionally capable persons might have been one reason for Early-Independent India to seek help from retired judges in handling key positions, particularly in English speaking countries. Today, there is no scarcity of English Orators or Jurists or Persons with Soft Skills. India abounds in English speakers and writers, Jurists and Judges, Engineers and Scientists, what not, albeit their numbers may still be low .



7. Justice Ranganath Mishra's Congress Ticket to Rajya Sabha

   When Justice Ranganath Mishra was made Rajya Sabha Member, there was a gap of nearly eight years (1991 to 1998). The allegation here is Justice Mishra gave a clean chit to Congress, in the Case of 1984 Rites post-IndiraGandhi-Assassination. In 1998, when Congress was in Opposition, a ticket was given to Jus. Mishra. As a Rajya Sabha Member from an Opposition Party, what benefits can Jus. Mishra derive?



8. Example of Jus. Bahrul Islam

   1956: He joined Congress. 1962: Congress elected him to Rajya Sabha . Later, he unsuccessfully contested an election. Reelected to Rajya Sabha, on Congress Ticket; aligned with Indira . 1972: Quit Rajya Sabha , and appointed as Gauhati High Court Judge . 1980: Retd. as High Court Judge . Elevated to Supreme Court . Gave clean chit to Bihar CM Jagannath Mishra in a corruption case. Later quit. 1983: Record third term to Rajya Sabha .


9. ybmad contg.: It is not clear whether Judicial Appointments in 1972 were 'independent' and 'non-political'. Prima facie, there are many similarities between the methods of Ms. Indira Gandhi and Mr Narendra Modi. Ms. Gandhi seemed to have set bad precedents.



10. CJI must have greater Prestige than President of India

    
    ybmad: The position of Chief Justice of India is to be regarded as equivalent of President of India. In India, President of India is considered by many Jurists as equivalent to Queen of England, in role-play, i.e. a Rubber Stamp. But, the CJI is not. CJI enjoys a near-Sovereignity. This ybrao-a-donkey's personal view. Supreme Court Benches can strike down Enactments made by Parliament and Ordinances issued by President. On the other hand, Nominated Members of Rajya Sabha rarely speak in the House, not only because they have no interest to speak or because they have no intellectual material to speak, but also because a Member getting an Opportunity to speak in Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha, is at the mercy of the Lok Sabha Speaker and Raj Sabha Chairman. As can be seen in TV Broadcasts of Proceedings of the Houses, the Chair repeatedly asks the Speakers to cut short.



11. Possibilities of quid pro quo, or future expectations of quid pro quo in judgements

    
    ybmad: Even before Jus. Ranjan Gogoi's retirement, careful Observers of Supreme Court Proceedings and Judgements during his tenure started experiencing a feeling that there might have been some sort of quid pro quo between the Government and some Judges but very few writers and journalists seemed to have expressed their hunches openly, may be because of apprehensions of possible Contempt of Court Proceedings , or facing wrath of Powers that Be.



12. Cases where doubts may arise about quid pro quo elements in Judgements

    
    ybmad: 1. Babri Masjid - Ram janmbhumi land dispute. 2. Allegations of Corruption in Rafale Aircraft deal.


13. Some words of Wisdom from Retd. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi, and yb'ass' views below them:



14. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...My answer is why not. I accepted the nomination for the same reason I accept the judgeship at the age of 45 when I had a lucrative practice. There is a practice in the bar that when a judgeship is offered you don't refuse. When the President makes an offer, you don't refuse. ...'



15. ybmad' personal views with no malice: In 2001, Jus. Gogoi seems to have shifted from Advocate's Practice to High Court Judge, when according to above quote, his practice was 'lucrative'. In 2018 June, he is reported to have sold his 1999 plot in Guwahati for Rs. 65 lakh . What could have been its purchase price in 1999? At the time of his elevation as Judge he is 45. Assuming that he started his practice when he is 25, from 20 years of practice, how much he could save? It is difficult to estimate or guess. But probably, the practice may not be such 'lucrative'. Or alternatively, lawyers' fee in Assam and Meghalaya may be lower than rest of India.


16. 
    ybmad: About practice in bar that when a judgeship is offered you don't refuse: This practice may not be a reasonable custom. The decision whether to accept judgeship or not has to be a personal decision, where the offeree has to apply his mind, depending on numerous factors, including his own beliefs and circumstances . No ethics or practices can probably intrude into this personal matter.


17. 
    ybmad: About 'when President makes an offer, you do not refuse': Presidents ought not make offers to retiring Supreme Court Judges and CJI, because prospects of these offers is likely to influence the independence of Supreme Court Judges and their Judgements.


18. 
    ybmad: There is a similar concept/practice in jurisprudence. When a client comes with a brief, and is prepared to pay fee asked, an Advocate cannot refuse the Brief. It is also said that a Lawyer should not prejudge the Case. It is said that a Lawyer is not an employee of his Client. On the other hand, he is an Employee of the Court and the Judge. He helps the Court and the Judge, in finding the truth. In ybass' personal view , this Concept may be true where facts are unknown, and where everything is obscure, and where the Judge, Prosecutor, Defence Counsel all try to explore truth. But, when a some Crime takes place in broad day light, in the presence of everybody, and where sufficient evidence direct and circumstantial are available, where everything is conspicuous and glaring , I do not find any reasonable logic in Defence Counsels not being given freedom to accept or reject, applying his conscience and mind.



19. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...So far as the cooling period is concerned, tell me under what law cooling period can be visualised? When you apply a law, apply it across the board, don't apply it on a case to case basis. How do you then man the tribunals, which are headed by retired Supreme Court judges?...'




20. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.:'...Do you think Rajya Sabha seat is a job, do you think it is a post-retirement rehabilitation? My statement was in the context of a judgment which dealt with tribunalisation - that's a job....'



21. 
    ybmad: Though salary may be low, perquisites will make up for the low salary. Besides, though the Rajya Sabha membership may not be as prestigious as a Supreme Court Judgeship, yet it counts. Most retired persons in India are persona non grata, unless they rehabilitate themselves by taking up some other employment / profession / business, which fetches lucrative income . For an example, let us see how Ms. Arundhati Bhattacharya rehabilitated herself after retiring as Chairperson of State Bank of India:


22. a. Additional Director /Independent Director, in Reliance Industries Ltd. Nobody knows what she would be doing or contributing to in Reliance, which is a Family Empire of Shri Dhirubai Ambani and Mukesh Ambani. Only time will tell. b. In Oct. 2018, Ms. Arundhati Bhattacharya was appointed as Additional Director, CRISIL. c. In Dec. 2018, Ms. Arundhati Bhattacharya was appointed as Swift India Chairman.[Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, a worldwide messaging platform for banks.]. This seems to be a full time job, while the Reliance Directorship is part-time. d. In March 2020 she resigned from Crisil, as a part of her job-shifts [or job-hops?]. e. Now, there are reports that she will be joining Sales Force India, a Branch of a $17b San Francisco Firm.



23. Question

    Why are you comparing the job-hops of Ms. Arundhati Bhattacharya with the rehabilitation of Jus. Ranjan Gogoi ?
    ybmad: Ans: Though, theoretically , Public Sector Banks in India are autonomous organisations , practically they do not seem to have real freedoms, even to operate within the written guidelines issued . CEOs of Public Sector Banks have to follow even oral instructions with zeal or more appropriately overzealosity [overzealousness], and after complying with the oral instructions , they should not seek confirmation of their irregular acts performed apropos the oral edicts and decrees from bosses. The moment the Managers in Public Sector Banks start working as per rules , they are shunted aside to some other assignment which no other colleague will be prepared to take up .


24. [ybmad contg.:] In case of Judges also, of late, some system of "setting aside" seems to have evolved . "Setting aside" some Functionary for valid reasons and following transparent practices and adhering to principles of Natural Justice need not be shunned upon . But, in Indian Judiciary Rationality, Transparency, Natural Justice, seem to be scarce items; and Extempore observations peppered with obiter dicta seem to be relished by one and all. Examples: One quote attributed to Jus. Ranjan Gogoi, while ruling on 'Urgent Mentionings":



25. Justice Ranjan Gogoi's quote: '...No mentioning! We are working out the parameters …if someone is being released today, then yes …if someone is being hanged today, then yes …if somebody is being evicted today, then yes …if there is a risk of demolition, yes …beyond that, No!...'




26. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '... I am not surprised by the walkout staged by the opposition during my swearing-in. ...It was expected, it was building up for the last two days - opposition parties walk out and walk in, I don't understand how that can upset any reasonable person ...'




27. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...These statements make me wonder if they amounted to contempt of court. ... Did I write those judgments alone? The other judges who were with me, what were they doing, were they not participating. And if it was a quid pro quo for the appointments, they are collectively responsible. ...'




28. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...Is it a rule that only if you write five judgments against the government then only you are eligible for nomination to the Rajya Sabha under Article 80? If you write judgments which turnout eventually in the favour of the government, do you become ineligible? ...'




29. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...C'mon, if it was a quid pro quo, we would not have stopped at Rajya Sabha membership. If the rules permit, I would not take any salary for the Rajya Sabha membership. ...'




30. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...Rajya Sabha nomination is not a lucrative post. ...'




31. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '... I am not interested in becoming a minister. ...'




32. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...I have seen ministers in family when I was a kid and I can tell you I am not interested in becoming one. ...'




33. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...I am not expecting an offer to ever come my way...'




34. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...I am neither a politician nor a leader. I was asked by the President to enlighten the Rajya Sabha debates with something I have been working on for the past 40 years of my life. I have no intention of getting into politics, joining a party, becoming a minister, but once in awhile I would like to participate in the discussions to the extent that the judiciary's point of view can be reflected. ...'




35. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...If executive tries to interfere in the judiciary it should be violently condemned, but the public is not aware of real reasons of the actions [like transfer of Justice Muralidhar in the middle of the riots], as it will not be in the public interest. That is why I say, trust your judges, don't suspect them...'

    .



36. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi contg.: March 2019 quote: "...there is a valid 'strong viewpoint' that the post-retirement appointment of judges in tribunals is a 'scar' on the 'independence of the judiciary'.



37. ybmad' personal views with no malice: For this, reply of Jus. Gogoi is: '...Do you think Rajya Sabha seat is a job, do you think it is a post-retirement rehabilitation? My statement was in the context of a judgment which dealt with tribunalisation - that's a job...'..


38. ybmad contg.: But, we have to keep in mind that Tribunal Appointments are Judicial in nature, though there is a tendency to treat Tribunals as Quasi-Judicials. It is hightime we change the Nomenclature of 'Tribunals' and redesignate them as Trial Courts, High Courts, Supreme Court Benches so that Sitting District Court Judges, High Court Judges, Supreme Court Judges can be appointed to them. Appointment of Sitting Judges to them will make them to exercise the same Powers as District Judges, High Court Judges and Supreme Court Judges. Then, like the Sitting Judges, they will also exercise full independence. If any technical assistance is required, they can take help from Experts, calling them amicus curiae.


39. [ybmad contg.:] Rajya Sabha Membership is not a judicial appointment. Ordinarily, members of different parties speak in the House, as per their Party affiliations. Though Nominated Members can assert their freedoms without joining the Ruling Party, it rarely happens . Mr. Narendra Modi and Mr. Amit Shah seem to have recommended to President, the Nomination of Jus. Ranjan Gogoi, with some foresight. Forced Implementation of NRC and NPR may take place probably in 2020 itself, or at least before 2024. The Ruling Party seems to be expecting considerable help from Shri Ranjan Gogoi and his brother Shri Anjan Gogoi in enforcing the NRC and NPR. If Shri Ranjan Gogoi is not going to have objections to join the Cabinet without preconditions, then the Ruling Party may not hesitate to induct him into Cabinet.


40. ybmad: When a chocolate is given to a child by a neighbor/stranger, the child does not think why that person is giving a chocolete. The child will simply take the chocolete, chew it and ask for more. But Judges and Retired Judges are not expected to be as gullible as children. On the other hand, circumspection, discretion and foresightfulness is expected from them.


41. 
    

    2016 Contempt of Court Judgement against the Jus. Markandey Katju, pertaining to his remark on Supreme Court 's judgement in Sowmya Rape and Murder Case of Kerala



42. In this case, Soumya age 23 years , travelling from Ernakulam to Shornur, was was pushed out of the train, dragged to some space beside the Rail Track and raped on the ground by a necrophile, convicted eight times in the past , resulting in her death/murder. The Trial Court convicted the Accused and awarded death sentence . And the Kerala High Court in a 339 page judgement confirmed the Death sentence . The Supreme Court Bench headed by Jus. Ranjan Gogoi, Jus. Prafulla C. Pant, and Jus. Uday Umesh Lalit set aside murder charges , and reduced the Punishment to 7 years u/s 365.



43. Where the Supreme Court seems to have erred in Soumya Case?

    
    ybmad: As per Post Mortem Report , there were two main injuries which led to her death : 1) A blunt injury. 2) A fall injury.



44. A quote from Supreme Court : "The death of the deceased was occasioned by a combination of injury no.1 and 2, and complications arising therefrom including aspiration of blood into the air passages, resulting in anoxic brain damage. The same, in the opinion of the doctor, had occurred due to the fact that the deceased was kept in a supine position for the purpose of sexual assault. We are of the opinion that the liability of the accused for Injury No.1 would not require a re-determination in view of the evidence. However, so far as Injury No.2 is concerned, unless the fall from the train can be ascribed to the accused on the basis of the cogent and reliable evidence, meaning thereby, that the accused had pushed the deceased out of the train and the possibility of the deceased herself jumping out of train is ruled out, the liability of the accused for the said injury may not necessary follow."



45. ybmad contg.: The logic used by Supreme Court Judges, appears to be strange. Reason: Why should a girl crying for help should jump out of a running Train on her own? Obviously because she was being chased by the Accused . We can't say that the Accused was waiting beside the railway track to see her jump out of the train, and rape&rob her? Whether the Victim jumped or the Accused pushed her is immaterial. The barbaric Acts of attempt to Rape and Rob by the Accused chasing her led to her fall. We can't say that the Accused was peacefully watching and smiling like Socrates when the Victim was falling .


46. ybmad contg.:Retired Justice Markandey Katju, is somewhat an outspoken Judge, somewhat candid and frank. About the judgement, he is reported to have commented : 'Gogoi did not even have 'elementary knowledge of law'.'


47. [ybmad contg.:] The remark might have been somewhat acerbic and caustic, may be born out of Jus. Katju's Seniority as Judge and in age to Jus. Gogoi. It could have just been taken lightly. But, the three Judge Bench led by Jus. Gogoi, Prafulla c. Pant and Uday Umesh Lalit seems to have taken the critiicism to their heart and called Jus. Katju for a Review Hearing and for Contempt of Court.



48. According to news reports: '...It prompted Justice Gogoi to slap a contempt notice on Justice Katju. When things heated up and Justice Katju reminded Justice Gogoi that he was junior to him, the serving judge asked if Justice Katju could be escorted out of the court. Only the loud murmurs of 'wrong, wrong, it’s wrong, your lordship' ensured that it did not happen....




49. Justice Katju's reaction: "...The court hearing is a pre-arranged drama organised by Gogoi with the intention to humiliate me...".



50. [ybmad contg.:] It is a different thing that Jus. Katju submitted his apologies to the Court. What is important for me here is, the view expressed by Jus. Katju is just a 'dissenting view'. It is born out of anguish and resentment against a basically erroneous interpretation and consequent laxity towards a grave habitual criminal, and gross injustice to the Victim who lost her womanhood and life owing to neglect of State. Else, there cannot be any other reason for the acrimonious and bitter relations between them .



51. HUSH HUSH Hush up of a "complaint of sexual harassment and subsequent harassment by Jus. Gogoi", from a Dalit Female Employee of Supreme Court



52. Pl. see References item No. 2, 19 below, an Outlookindia.com report.


53. On 19th April 2019, a Lady Junior Court Assistant of Supreme Court complained to the HON. JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT, alleging 'Sexual harassment and consequent victimisation of me and my family at the hands of Chief Justice of India '. According to her , she worked in Supreme Court from 1.5.2014 to 21.12.2018, when her services were unceremoniously terminated. She was barbarically treated. A quote from her Complaint :



54. Victim Staffer contg.: '... The extent of victimisation has been such that apart from my services being terminated in December 2018 , in the same month , my husband and his brother , both Head Constables with the Delhi Police have been suspended . My husband's other younger brother who was given a job in Group D category in the Supreme Court under the Chief Justice's discretionary quota in October 2018 , was also terminated without giving any reasons , in January 2019 . Not only this , a false and frivolous FIR was registered against me on 3rd March 2019 (alleging that I took an advance of Rs. 50,000/- from a certain Mr. Naveen from Jhajjar, in the Supreme Court premises for offering him a job in the Supreme Court in 2017 ) on the basis of which I was arrested late at night , shakled from my feet , my husband was beaten up in police custody and hand-cuffed (though he was not arrested ). I was kept in police custody of one day and judicial custody for one day. Consequently I was forced to obtain bail . Thereafter, an Application has been made by the police for cancellation of my bail ...'



55. 
    ybmad: Prior to her dismissal from Service, a namesake Disciplinary Inquiry was conducted against her, by one of the eight Registrars of the Supreme Court Shri Surya Pratap Singh. As per Ref. No.26 at the bottom hereinbelow, Shri Surya Pratap Singh was the Principal Secretary to Justice Ranjan Gogoi when Justice Gogoi was Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court , Chandigarh. Singh's previous association with Justice Ranjan Gogoi , raises some doubts about the impartiality of the Disciplinary Proceedings.


56. 
    ybmad contg.: Reason: When the accused woman staffer who was facing the Inquiry for some minor violations (the Disciplinary Inquiry apparently has proximity with the incident of the Woman Staffer turning down the sexual-initiatives of Jus. Gogoi at his Official Residence), arrived on the inquiry date 17th Dec. 2018, at 10:17 am before the Office of Shri Singh, Inquiry Officer-cum-Registrar, she informed the peon there about her arrival; but owing to fatigue and nervousness caused by her having suffered many hardships, she fainted there and fell unconscious. The Supreme Court staff nearby shifted her to Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital in an unconscious condition. RML Hospital Authorities who have treated her have issued a certificate to her to that effect, which she is reported to have submitted to her Superiors.


57. 
    ybmad contd.: In those circumstances , the Disciplinary Inquiry Proceedings ought to have been conducted after the Staffer's Recovery from her illness. Instead, Shri SP Singh was reported to have chosen to hold the Inquiry Ex parte. Besides, she was also not allowed to get assistance from another Government employee, who is not a Supreme Court Employee. Thus, having not been an opportunity to defend herself, the Woman Staffer was dismissed IMMEDIATELY IN FOUR DAYS. Her dismissal was communicated to her by another Registrar Shri Deepak Jain on 21.12.2018.


58. 
    
    ybmad: In May 2019 , an in-House Committee headed by Jus. S.A. Bobde, consisting in addition, Justice Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee , quickly cleared the allegations against the Jus. Ranjan Gogoi, as baseless. Their decision was an ex parte decision. It found "no substance" in the sexual harassment allegations against Ranjan Gogoi The Complainant Lady Staffer, after attending three Sessions, withdrew on the ground that the Committee is insensitive.


59. 
    

    Complaining Lady Staffer's reaction to the Clean Chit

    '...Today, my worst fears have come true, and all hopes of justice and redress from the highest court of the land have been shattered....'.




60. Victim Staffer contg.: "...I, the woman complainant, a former SC employee, am not just highly disappointed and dejected to learn that the In-House Committee 'has found no substance' in my complaint, but feel that gross injustice has been done to me as a woman citizen of India....".




61. Victim Staffer contg.: '...I am now extremely scared and terrified because the in-house committee, despite having all material placed before them, has given me no justice or protection and said nothing about the absolutely malafide dismissals and suspensions, indignities and humiliations suffered by me and my family...'.




62. Victim Staffer contg.: '...As is known this complaint, in the form of an affidavit, was sent by me to the Justices of the Honourable Supreme Court on April 19, I am alarmed at the conclusion arrived at by the in-house committee, as my accusation of sexual harassment at the workplace and the consequent relentless victimization and reprisals against me and my family, are substantiated by documents and are verifiable....'.




63. Victim Staffer contg.: '...On April 26, I had joined proceedings of the in-house committee and from the very beginning expressed serious concerns and reservations that the manner in which the proceedings were being conducted, it would not mitigate the stark asymmetry of power between me and CJI Ranjan Gogoi....'.




64. Victim Staffer contg.: '...In fact, the committee has announced that I will not even be provided with a copy of the report, and so I have no way of comprehending the reasons and basis for the summary dismissal of my complaint of sexual harassment and victimisation...'.



65. 
    ybmad. contg.: As there are no direct eye witnesses for the incident that took place between Justice Ranjan Gogoi and the Complainant Lady Staffer in the residence of the Chief Justice of India , the In-House Committee ought to have explored other types of evidences. The Complainant requested that call-data of the phone calls which took place from CJI's phones and her phone be checked. A look into the call-date would have definitely helped in getting at least a sort of sketchy perception if not accurate picture about who took initiative, how the recipient responded, length of conversations, timing of conversations, what proportion of the conversations were strictly official, what proportion are only personal, and proportion are mixed.


66. 
    ybmad contd.: I get an impression that the In-House Committee might have proceeded strictly in an Formal-Official manner. Though, that may be the stipulated procedure , the In-House Committee ought to have taken into consideration that the Complainant a Junior Low level Employee, a housewife, preparing for Law Examination, is facing the highest legal luminaries in the country, who have imbibed law points and legal procedures for about 30 years each. This could definitely made the Woman Employee who had been facing hardships after her dismissal, suspension of her husband, brother-in-law , criminal cases against her, her husband and her brother-in-law , which resulted in her getting shackled.


67. 
    ybmad contg.: Another question which lurks in mind is: Has the In-House Inquiry Committee visited the Rooms in the Residence of Jus. Ranjan Gogoi , where the alleged incident of harassment took place ? Did the Committee members make any inquiries from the Supreme Court Staff working at the Official Residence of the Chief Justice of India ? Did they try to find out if there were any CC Cameras in Work Rooms of CJI where he took help from the JCA?


68. 
    ybmad contg.: The InHouse Committee rejected the request of the complainant to make available a copy of their Inquiry Report. Had the Committee made available their Report to the Victim Female Staffer, she would have at least known on what grounds her Complaint was rejected. All the three Judges on the InHouse Committee are all great Legal Luminaries with vast experience and talents. Then, how could they deny Natural Justice to the Complainant ?


69. 
    ybmad contg.: Charges against the Staffer: 1) Questioning the decision of senior officers, when her seat was changed. 2) Bring influence from unacceptable quarters, to stop change of her seat 3) unauthorisedly absented herself from duty on November 17, 2018. 4) Insubordination, indiscipline and lack of devotion to duty.


70. 
    ybmad contg.: Dismissal from a Secured job which is livelihood for a person, is nearly equivalent to a Death Sentence for that person. Just as Death Sentence is to be awarded to a Murderer in rarest of the rarest cases, Dismissal may be ordered in rarest of the rarest cases. Another question which occurs to my donkey's mind is-- were similar dismissal sentences awarded to other Staffers of the Supreme Court in the past, or at later dates? (i.e. after dismissal of the Female Staffer on 21.12.2018, to other Staffers who committed similar offenses/irregularities?)


71. 
    ybmad: In Reference 26 below, it can be found that the Female Staffer submitted her explanations, apologies for her omissions and commissions, which the Inquiry Committee seems to have ignored, and if she makes it Public. (This can be known only if/when a copy of the DP Inquiry Report is made available to the concerned Employee. Public today in India cannot expected such high level of transparency in Indian Offices, where these Reports are placed on their Websites.)


72. 
    See Reference No. 20, below. Around 22st January 2020, the Complainant was reinstated. See Reference No. 21, below. In June 2019 itself, her husband and brother-in-law were reinstated by Delhi Police. However, as per them, Departmental Inquiry against them is still pending. The Departmental Inquiry against the husband was for 'illegally calling CJI Office'. Inquiry against her brother-in-law was for concealment of a 2015 Police complaint against him for 'unruly behavior '.


73. Indian Express has reported that, the woman has rejoined her job and is currently on leave. She has reportedly been paid arrears for the time she was not allowed to work at the court.



74. Retd. Jus. A.K. Patnaik's view: A Judge should retire gracefully

    '...I don’t understand why the former CJI should accept the nomination to the Rajya Sabha or even get elected. He has no role there. Neither should a President appoint a former CJI to the RS and nor should he accept it. That is how institutions are maintained. A judge should retire gracefully...'.




75. Jus. A.K. Patnaik contg.:'...We have to maintain the independence and purity of institutions. One cannot mix these things. If the government wanted someone from the legal field, there are many others who could have contributed; there are several lawyers and legal academicians who should have been considered… ..'




76. Victim Staffer contg.: '...He (Gogoi) should have worked out his career earlier if he had wanted to be a politician. Rajya Sabha members have a great role to play, but judiciary has its own role....'.




77. The peers of Jus. Ranjan Gogoi--Retd. Justices Madan Lokur, Kurian Joseph, and retired High Court Chief Justice A.P. Shah too did not appreciate Jus. Gogoi's Nomination to Rajya Sabha.



78. This is apart from Retired Justice Markandey Katju, Senior to Ranjan Gogoi, is very critical of his former Junior Colleague who has in Open Court instructed that Jus. Katju be escorted out.


79. [ybmad contg.:] Jus. Ranjan Gogoi replied to their criticism , rather somewhat acerbically. A gem from Jus. Ranjan Gogoi:--



80. Justice Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...I think he (Justice Katju) is irrelevant, ignore him. Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Madan Lokur, who were my good friends - they have their own problems; failed ambitions. As far as Justice AP Shah is concerned - the 'champion of independent judiciary' - it is a matter of record, there are three allegations against, him, for which his name was not recommended for Supreme Court ... Today, along with Kurian Joseph and Madan Lokur, he defends the independence of judiciary? Nothing more I would like to add… These are matters of record. Apply under RTI, you will get everything....'




81. Justice Ranjan Gogoi quote: "...As far as 'failed ambitions' are concerned, that is a matter of perception - like the perception of Justice Kurian and Justice Lokur that my accepting the nomination is the downfall of the judiciary. These are perceptions. So far as AP Shah is concerned, it’s a matter of record...."



82. [ybmad contg.:] This reply does not befit a retired CJI.



83. Justice Ranjan Gogoi quote : '...Is the nomination to the Rajya Sabha a post retirement employment? I’m really sorry, this is not correct. What are these values? Where are these ideas coming from? You attend sessions 60 days in a year... your package is less or equivalent to the post retirement package of a CJI. You get accommodation that is four stages below what you got as a CJI - and then you call it a post retirement package and a benefit conferred for judgments written by the Chief Justice of India? This is a view that only the enemies of this country can take....'.



84. [ybmad contg.:] 'This is a view that only the enemies of this country can take' this sentence seems to be part of BJP's vocabulary. Whoever criticises BJP and Hon. Narendra Modi , are considered as 'enemies of India' as per BJP culture.



85. Justice Ranjan Gogoi contg.: '...How (does) the judgments or the position that I have held until 18th of November have anything to do with the nomination to the Rajya Sabha.. ...what Is the connection between the two? I have completed the two, I have delivered my judgements, my judgments were unanimous - there were other 3-5 judges on the Bench - they agreed, it was a common order. I completed my tenure, went into retirement. The president recalled me from my retirement, required my services for 60 days in a year in the Rajya Sabha....'.



86. [ybmad contg.:] In India, wherever group discussions are supposed to take place and group decisions are taken, today we have a culture of 'DU DU basavanna'. DU DU Basavanna is a Telugu phrase which refers to the Decorated trained-Bulls which shake their heads, raise their paws, salute their masters and donors, and even dance as per their expectations during Makara Sankranti Festival days. Basavanna means Lord Nandi (also called Basavaiah/Basavanna).


87. [ybmad contg.:] This DU DU Basavanna culture prevails in State Cabinet Meetings, Union Cabinet Meetings where Ministers simply okay everything placed before them without deeply thinking about the implications or probable consequences of what they support and resolve in the Cabinet meetings . This happens because , it is Chief Minister/Prime Minister's prerogative to appoint/continue/remove/change portfolios of their Ministers. Hence CMs and PM become virtual dictators.


88. ybmad contg: This type of political behaviors are not expected in Judiciary , because CJI does not appoint Supreme Court Judges ; CJ of High Courts do not appoint High Court Judges . CJI is not boss of Supreme Court Judges . CJI of a High Court is not for the judges of his High Court . For that matter, even President cannot, with or without the Recommendation of the Cabinet, remove Supreme Court Judges and High Court Judges . There is an Impeachment Procedure to be followed as prescribed in Indian Constitution . All these protections are intended to enable the Supreme Court Judges and High Court Judges to take decisions AS PER THEIR CONSCIENE, AND BEYOND THE PALE OF UNDUE INFLUENCE. Therefore , junior Members of Supreme Court and High Court benches have a Constitutional Right and Constitutional Duty to write their judgements independently, recording their dissents wherever needed, without inhibitions.


89. ybmad contg: In the 2018 'Open Criticism' of the four Senior Collegium Judges in a Press Conference arose from a dissatisfaction that Chief Justice of India Jus. Deepak Misra was arbitrarily allocating important cases to Junior Judges. Then, Chief Justice of India claimed that it was his prerogative to allocate Cases. Ruling Government of 2018 has not apparently expressed its opinion/view probably because the-then Rulers might have expected that Junior Judges will favor them or will be less arrogant. Jus. Deepak Misra had his way.


90. [ybmad contg.:] True unanimity is possible in spite of written expression of dissent. Apparent Unanimity need not be True unanimity. Excessive number of unanimities may, sometimes, be an indication of concealed inner dissensions. To ensure judgements are made consciously, conscientiously, and independently, we need a secret ballot system, for the ultimate conclusions arrived at in the judgements , while the ratio decidendi explain the reasons for the decisions.



91. Jus. Ranjan Gogoi's view: '...I read the Constituent Assembly debates on Article 80 and I found that this is really a call for service to enlighten and elevate the debates on my area of specialisation. That’s all....'.



92. [ybmad contg.:] Rajya Sabha Chairpersons, also being Vice Presidents, are expected to be free of bias, independent, befitting their stature. But, this is not happening. Sometimes, we find that Lok Sabha Speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairperson not giving reasonable time to opposition MPs to express their views. There is also a rigid tendency to allocate proportionate time for speaking, on the basis of the No. of MPs Opposition Parties command. This leads to oppression /suppression of expression of dissent , by Opposition MPs when in a particular General Election Opposition strength is decimated to near-nought.



93. View of Justice B.A. Khan, Chief Justice of Jammu and Kashmir High Court

    '...Nomination of Retd. Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, casts a shadow on the independence of the judiciary, and poses a threat to the scheme of separation of powers under the Constitution....'.




94. Jus. B.A. Khan's view: '...Mr Gogoi also says that though he deprecated post retirement assignments given to retired judges, it does not apply to him because being nominated as a Rajya Sabha members was not a regular post retirement employment....'.




95. Justice B.A. Khan contg.: '...This part of Mr Gogoi’s argument would have to be taken with a pinch of salt. The issue is not whether a Rajya Sabha seat is a regular employment or not. It is immaterial whether Mr Gogoi gets more or less salary as a member of Rajya Sabha. The fact is that he gets a six-year term entitling him to a regular salary, allowances, free air and rail travel, residential accommodation in Lutyens Delhi etc....'.



96. [ybmad contg.:] Rajya Sabha membership is nearly sinecure. A job which needs 60 days work in a 365 days frame, is if not a sinecure, what? Ordinarily , non-Ruling-Party Rajya Sabha members rarely get opportunities to speak; even if they get, they will meet with frequent interruptions from Chairperson himself saying 'stop it' or 'conclude it'. Chairperson of Rajya Sabha may give some leeway to a Retired Chief Justice of India by extending time , by asking members not to interrupt . But a Rajya Sabha member who find his dissenters as unbearable, cannot ask Marshals to escort them out. Can we expect that Rajya Sabha Chairpersons who are ordinarily Politicians, will continuously keep a Retired Chief Justice of India on a high pedestal and listen to him silently in reverance, without asking him to 'conclue'? This is a billion dollar question !



97. 'Justice J.A. Khan contg.:...Mr Gogoi’s washing of dirty linen against Justice AP Shah is unethical and violates his oath of secrecy. It does not behove a former CJI to go public with confidential records of a former state Chief Justice...if he is permitted to go unbridled then one can legitimately ask several questions on the alleged sexual harassment charges against him, more particularly who passed the order of reinstatement of the lady staffer dismissed from service, in violation of all laws and norms of justice....'.




98. Jus. B.A. Khan's views contd.: '...Mr Gogoi should put up with dissent sportingly, to ensure that such controversies do not arise in the future...'. '...A law would have to enacted banning Chief Justices and judges of the Supreme Court from accepting any post retirement engagement/job/assignment offered by the government to preserve and safeguard the rule of law and independence the judiciary as a custodian of the Constitution....'



99. [ybmad contg.:] Justice Ranjan Gogoi tried to link the case of the Sexual Allegations against him by a Junior-Dalit Court Staffer to another case of alleged larger plots and sinister attempts of some XYZ to defame the Supreme Court or Chief Justice of India, though both are different issues. The second Complaint was lodged by one young Lawyer Mr. U.S. Bains.


100. [ybmad contg.:] Jus. Arun Roy's Court entrusted the conspiracies hatched by a gang of "disgruntled employees, corporate figures and fixers" have been entrusted to be dug up by CBI Director , Director of Intelligence Bureau , and Commissioner of Police , Delhi . The disgruntled employees were reported as Tapan Kumar Chakraborty and Manav Sharma, who were dismissed from service for allegedly doctoring a judicial order in a contempt case between Ericsson and businessman Anil Ambani. It is not clear how far the three Agencies/Functionaries progressed in their crucial task.


101. 
     [ybmad contg.:] The Dalit Junior Court-Assistant's allegations about sexual initiatives by Justice Ranjan Gogoi, were expected to be inquired into by Retd. Jus. A.K. Patnaik. As per Ref. 22 below, Justice Patnaik submitted a Report in Sept 2019 stating the matter needed further probe. In Nov. 2019 Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi retired . According to Reference 22 below, She was reinstated before Justice Gogoi was superannuated. That means, reinstatement took place before Nov. 2019 . But, the news of her Reinstatement appeared in Media in on 22 Jan 2020 .



102. Justice Arun Misra's Observation, while hearing Bain's Affidavit relating to Larger Plot

     '...The two enquiries will not prejudice each other. The judges committee is also not empowered to look into a larger conspiracy...'.

     .



103. Justice Misra contg: '...Disgruntled employees have ganged up... The 'fixing part' itself is of grave concern. It has no place in the system. He [Bains] has named a fixer. We want to go into the root of matter... We want to know who these fixers are. They have no right to be part of a judicial system... We cannot allow the denigration of the judiciary. We will enquire and enquire and enquire until we get to the truth, to the root of the matter...'.




104. Justice Deepak Gupta contd.: '...We cannot just keep quiet when a lawyer approaches it with an affidavit claiming a frame-up. Otherwise, this institution will not survive. You will not survive. If we keep quiet, the country will lose faith in this institution. The institution is bigger than all of us...'.




105. Justice Misra contd.: '...This is not just an inquiry, this is something more... We will not reveal anything. This will be kept totally a secret. We do not want the evidence to be destroyed...'.




106. An oral observation attributed to Justice Misra: '...This CJI wants to clean up the system. No CJI had dared to take such an action, but this CJI has the courage to take a decision. This CJI is taking action after action after action,...'.




107. 2020 January- Comment of Justice Katju against the Justice Ranjan Gogoi, particularly about Sexual Misconduct




108. Justice Katju's view, Jan2020: '...At last the woman employee who was sexually molested by CJI Gogoi and victimised along with her family has been reinstated. There was no vice which was not in Ranjan Gogoi. And yet this rascal and rogue rose to become CJI. It speaks volumes about our judiciary......'.




109. [Justice Katzu contg.: '..."Brother and sister judges" of the Supreme Court instead of seeking to protect the complainant, protected Gogoi....'. '...How low a man was this rascal Ranjan Gogoi can be seen from the fact that he not only got the woman he sexually molested dismissed because she complained against him, but his vendetta was not thereby satisfied. He went after her whole family, and misusing his position as CJI got them sent to jail. And what about his brother/sister judges? They should have asked Gogoi to resign, but many of them protected him, instead of protecting that poor woman and her relatives. Shame on them....'



110. ybmad contg.:Though there is some mutual mud slinging between Jus. Katju and Jus. Gogoi, it is difficult to interpret that there is bitter deep animosity between them . Jus. Katju is outspoken, with no bounds, while Justice Gogoi seems to be somewhat arrogant, haughty, and vindictive.


111. 
     ybmad: One important question which Justice Katju raised in Ref. 13 at bottom, is:



112. Jus. Katju: '...Several other such shocking instances can be given. Gogoi is at fault during his tenure as chief justice of India, but why were the other justices in the Supreme Court mute like Bheeshma Pitamah, seeing the /cheer haran /of the Supreme Court? Are they not equally culpable? Why did they not hold an open press conference to recount Gogoi’s misdeeds, as was done in the case of Misra?...'.



113. 
     ybmad: The word 'cheer haran' above, refers to an attempt by Prince DussAsana to disrobe PAnDava Queen Draupadi in King DhritarAshtra's Court, after YudhishThira was defeated in a mischievous game of dice. According to Vyasa MahAbhArata Lord Krishna saved her by sending her an unending stream of a saree. In that sordid episode the Grand-sire of Kuru Race i.e. BhIshma pitAmaha, archery Guru Drona, his brother Kripacharya remained helpless spectators. Justice Katju's question that if the four Senior Collegium Judges of Jus. Dipak Misra's CJIship could express their open dissatisfaction , why did the Senior Collegium Judges of Jus. Gogoi's regime choose to remain silent?, is very pertinent and reasonable.


114. 
     ybmad: This question seems to have multiple answers, any of which could be true . 1. The result of the previous Open Expression of dissatisfaction has not apparently been fruitful. This is ybmad's subjective view. 2. Though Justice Gogoi in spite of joining the Dissenting Collegium Judges against the Justice Dipak Mishra , could manage well with the Powers that be , and he could keep his cake and eat it too, by getting a post-retirement nomination to Rajya Sabha . With this how the expectations of others will be fulfilled ? Probably, the Senior about-to-retire Judges might have felt that by co-operating with the Chief Justice of India and the Government, they will get their post-retirement expectations such as appointments to head Tribunals , Commissions, Governors (e.g. Retired Chief Justice of India Justice Sathasivam, Govroka



115. References

     1. (Click to go to) https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/won-t-take-salary-not-my-aim-to-be-minister-ex-cji-ranjan-gogoi-1657605-2020-03-19


116. 2. https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-news-judiciary-under-threat-says-cji-ranjan-gogoi-denies-sexual-harassment-allegations/329044


117. 3. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/nation-world/not-much-work-but-lots-of-perks-for-indian-mps/free-phone-calls/slideshow/56199066.cms


118. 4. https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/ranjan-gogoi-new-chief-justice-of-india-2018-justice-ranjan-gogoi-cji-supreme-court-judges-2018-dipak-misra-total-net-worth-assets-bank-balance/293429


119. 5. https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/arundhati-bhattacharyas-new-role-can-the-former-banker-fast-track-salesforces-india-growth-5047831.html


120. 6. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/failed-ambitions-are-reasons-behind-criticisms-against-me-ranjan-gogoi/videoshow/74756337.cms


121. 7. https://www.firstpost.com/india/ranjan-gogoi-says-no-mentioning-in-supreme-court-unless-urgent-new-cji-says-parameters-are-being-worked-out-5309301.html


122. 8. https://theprint.in/judiciary/cji-ranjan-gogoi-the-revolutionary-judge-who-often-found-himself-making-headlines/321619/


123. 9. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soumya_murder_case


124. 10. https://www.barandbench.com/news/rajya-sabha-membership-a-call-to-service-asserts-ex-cji-ranjan-gogoi-justice-retd-ak-patnaik-says-a-judge-should-retire-gracefully


125. 11. https://thewire.in/women/former-supreme-court-employee-alleges-sexual-harassment-by-chief-justice-gogoi .


126. 12. https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-justice-sacrifice-sexual-harassment-allegations-ranjan-gogoi


127. 13. https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/02/04/opinion-cji-gogoi-was-blot-on-judiciary-but-other-sc-judges-equally-culpable.html


128. 14. https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/03/17/pre-retirement-judgments-and-post-retirement-posts-judges-and-their-politics.html


129. 15. https://www.barandbench.com/news/conspiracy-to-frame-cji-ranjan-gogoi-needs-further-probe-justice-patnaik-committee


130. 16. https://www.barandbench.com/news/breaking-in-house-committee-clears-cji-ranjan-gogoi-says-no-substance-in-allegations


131. 17. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/cji-ranjan-gogoi-gets-clean-chit-in-sexual-harassment-case-sc-panel-dismisses-charge-1518425-2019-05-06


132. 18. https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/sc-resolves-to-unearth-larger-conspiracy-against-cji-ranjan-gogoi/article26933155.ece


133. 19. https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/01/23/this-rascal-rogue-rose-to-be-cji-katju-blasts-gogoi-over-sexual-abuse-scandal.html


134. 20. https://www.theweek.in/news/india/2020/01/22/sc-reinstates-woman-staffer-who-accused-ranjan-gogoi-of-sexual-misconduct.html


135. 21. https://thewire.in/women/supreme-court-reinstates-staffer-who-accused-ex-cji-ranjan-gogoi-of-sexual-harassment


136. 22. https://www.dailyo.in/politics/cji-ranjan-gogoi-supreme-court-of-india-sexual-harassment-justice-patnaik-committee/story/1/32405.html


137. 23. https://www.dailyo.in/voices/supreme-court-ranjan-gogoi-sabarimala-judicial-activism-indu-malhotra/story/1/28172.html


138. 24. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/gogoi-chief-justice-supreme-court-sexual-harassment-complainant-husband-kin-1552407-2019-06-20


139. 25. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/cji-ranjan-gogoi-clean-chit-sexual-harassment-case-my-worst-fears-came-true-1518609-2019-05-06


140. 26. https://thewire.in/law/surya-pratap-sing-ranjan-gogoi-inquiry-woman-complainant-supreme-court

go to top