AMU violence, CAA protests — the cases that made Justice Mathur ‘defender of civil rights’

Justice Govind Mathur who retired as Allahabad High Court chief justice on 13 April, is known for taking suo motu cognizance of several issues, including internet shutdowns in UP.

Justice Govind Mathur | Photo courtesy allahabadhighcourt.in

New Delhi: “What can be more unfortunate than not being able to sit in court on my last working day,” a teary-eyed Justice Govind Mathur had said earlier this week, speaking at his farewell ceremony on 13 April.

“I lost the last five precious days of my working life owing to testing positive for Covid. I am having to attend even this ceremony virtually, from home and won’t have the opportunity to sit in court on my last working day,” he added.

Justice Mathur started his career as an advocate, in September 1983, and was elevated to the position of a judge in the Rajasthan High Court almost two decades later in September 2004. He then made his way to the position of chief justice of the country’s biggest high court, the Allahabad High Court.

Several of his judgments — such as the one quashing the National Security Act charges against Dr Kafeel Khan and his orders in the ‘name and shame’ posters case (banners put up against people accused of damaging public property during the anti-CAA protest) — have since earned him praise for being a “defender of civil liberties” and “core constitutional values”. His tenure at the Allahabad High Court was marked with him taking suo motu cognizance of several issues, including internet shutdowns in the state during the CAA protests.

The chief justice, however, drew criticism for his administrative handling of the court during the pandemic, when his decision to hear cases physically, even at a time when many lawyers were testing positive for the disease, displeased many.

While one high court lawyer called him the “voice of human justice”, another lawyer called him “a good man with a few not-so-good decisions”.

From bar to the bench

Justice Mathur began his tenure as a judge at the Rajasthan High Court in 2004, where he was a part of a bench that took suo motu cognizance of a news item published in a local newspaper regarding the pathetic situation of Pakistani minorities in India. While hearing this case, the court had also restrained the central and state governments from deporting Pakistani Hindus forcibly, without any valid reason, for security purposes.

He also drew attention for having reportedly criticised the criminal law amendments proposed by the Rajasthan government, which sought to give special protection to public servants, by making it mandatory for judicial magistrates to seek government sanction before ordering probes against them. This was on 23 October 2017. A day later, the bill was referred to a select committee of the Rajasthan assembly by the government and was withdrawn by the assembly in February 2018.

However, it was as chief justice of the Allahabad High Court that Justice Mathur really left his mark. He was transferred to the court in November 2017 and in October 2018, was appointed as its acting chief justice. He took oath as chief justice on 14 November 2018.

Namkeens & ‘name-and-shame’ posters

Justice Mathur’s over three-year tenure at the high court was marked with several initiatives from his side to take up cases suo motu — on his own, without any petitions in court. The list of his suo motu cases is long and diverse, from ‘rejected namkeens’ being resold to right to privacy violations.

For instance, last year in March, a bench headed by Justice Mathur ordered the removal of the ‘name and shame posters’. These were banners with photographs and personal details of over 50 people that were put up across Lucknow, asking them to pay compensation for allegedly damaging public property during the anti-CAA protest. The court took suo motu cognizance of the hoardings and said that this was “nothing but an unwarranted interference in privacy of people”.

Days before this, another bench headed by him took cognizance of a news report on “rejected Namkeens of branded companies procured in the name of cattle feed”. According to the report, the stocks of rejected, substandard namkeens of big brands, purchased at auctions as cattle feed, were being adulterated and resold by local brands.

In December last year, he also took suo motu cognizance of an incidence of police assault on a lawyer, Rajendra Sharma, in Etah, UP, directing the chief judicial magistrate of Etah, to submit a detailed report on the incident. The magistrate submitted the report in a sealed cover. The court raised several questions on 19 January this year, including whether a lawyer in black robes can be exempted from coercive police action. The case is pending.

Police excesses, AMU violence, Kafeel Khan

As a judge, it was a combination of four orders that seemed to have hurled Justice Mathur into the spotlight, leading to a high court lawyer calling him the “voice of human justice”.

The first three cases came in the aftermath of the growing public displeasure with the Uttar Pradesh government for its handling of the anti-citizenship law protests in December 2019. A bench headed by Justice Mathur had then stepped in to take cognizance of several allegations about the state’s deteriorating law and order situation.

In one of the orders issued in December 2019, the court had directed the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to probe alleged police violence on the Aligarh Muslim University campus during anti-CAA protests.

After the NHRC submitted its report, the court in February last year ordered the Yogi government to adhere to its recommendations, which included compensation to six students who were grievously injured, and identification of policemen involved.

In December 2019, the same bench took suo motu cognisance of the internet shutdowns in the state following the prohibitory orders issued under Section 144 CrPC over CAA protests.

In the third order, the court took suo motu cognisance of a letter written by Mumbai-based lawyer Ajay Kumar on 7 January, noting allegations of police atrocities mentioned in two news reports. In a subsequent hearing in the case on, 27 January, the court had sought details from the state authorities on the people killed in police action during the protests, their post mortem reports, details of their injuries, information on the complaints filed against police officials during this time, and details of medical aid given to the protesters. The matter is currently pending.

Another bench headed by him came to the rescue of Dr Kafeel Khan, dropping the National Security Act charges against him and calling the order of his detention “bad”. The order passed in September last year came as a huge relief to Khan, who had been in jail for seven months by then. He has been released since.

The lawyer also pointed out that Justice Mathur significantly contributed to quick disposal of old criminal appeals pending for over a decade in the court, along with the disposal of hundreds of criminal writ petitions.

Holiday hearings

A lawyer practicing in the high court told ThePrint that Justice Mathur “did not hesitate to pass an order” and was also “very accommodating” when it came to fixing the dates for cases being heard by him.

“Justice does not flow from the chair, it is inherent in the person who occupied the chair. Justice was inherent in Justice Mathur,” the lawyer told ThePrint on the condition of anonymity.

Another young lawyer added that Justice Mathur was “very compassionate for law students raising issues in public interest litigations” and that he gave “patient hearings” to petitioners appearing in person without a lawyer.

A third lawyer pointed out that he heard several cases on days when the court was shut. For instance, the bench headed by him took cognizance of the name-and-shame posters issue on a Saturday and heard the matter on Sunday, directing removal of the banners.

In 2019, on Gandhi Jayanti, a national holiday, a bench headed by Justice Mathur assembled to hear a habeas corpus petition for an Indian Army soldier who had been missing for over 14 months. The court took up the matter after Justice Mathur received a letter from the father of Sepoy Rajat Singh, the missing soldier.

Criticism during the Covid 

When Covid-19 struck, Justice Mathur took suo motu cognizance of the condition of various quarantine centres across Prayagraj. The same bench had subsequently directed that all migrants in UP should be properly quarantined for at least 15 days, in quarantine centres having adequate sanitization, food and medical facilities.

However, several lawyers expressed their criticism of Justice Mathur’s administrative handling of the court, claiming that from June last year, most of the cases in the high court were being heard physically, despite the nation being in a state of near-lockdown.

Local lawyers told ThePrint that there weren’t adequate systems in place to hold video conferencing in the Allahabad High Court while the Lucknow bench of the high court was much better equipped for virtual hearings.

Earlier in February this year, Justice Mathur approved resumption of normal functioning of the court from 1 March, including functioning of the photo affidavit centre in the court. However, this resumption coincided with the increase in the number of Covid-19 cases across the country, with several high court lawyers testing positive as well.

According to a lawyer practicing at the high court, thousands of lawyers would gather at the centre every day for their cases. The centre was finally shut again a month later, along with other restrictions being put in place, after several lawyers tested positive.

While some lawyers blamed the chief justice for not handling the pandemic situation well, others came to Justice Mathur’s rescue and instead blamed the sheer volume and influx of cases at the court and the lack of adequate technology for the situation.

(Edited by Poulomi Banerjee)