NV Ramana: The Chief Justice of India who didn’t like shouting in court

Ramana's legacy includes an increase in judicial appointments and important interventions including suspension of sedition law. But no Constitution Bench matter was heard in his tenure.

File photo of N.V. Ramana | Praveen Jain | ThePrint

New Delhi: On Thursday, a day before he retired, outgoing Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana offered some parting advice to lawyers: “Please do not resort to shouting. Shouting harms your health and changes nothing in the case. We judges from south India are afraid of shouting, feel it is resorted to when a case has little merit.”

When Ramana took over the reins of the apex court on 24 April, 2021, multiple challenges awaited him. Covid had halted physical hearings in the Supreme Court, a lack of consensus in the collegium led by his predecessor had virtually stalled judicial appointments, particularly to the top court, and several cases involving significant questions of law had remained unheard for months.

Known for his calm and composed demeanour, the CJI gradually resolved many issues, mostly on the administrative side, including bringing vacancies down to the lowest level since 2016. On the judicial front, too, he took up some significant matters, in which the state was called upon to give legal justifications for its actions.

However, Ramana did not hear any Constitution Bench matter during his 16-month-long tenure. There are 492 Constitution Bench matters that are yet to be taken up for a hearing, of which 41 cases are main matters, in which decisions will also dispose of most of the connected cases.

Moreover, the pendency of cases has also increased by more than 4,000 since he took over the post in April last year, when a little over 67,000 cases were pending. At present, the Supreme Court has at least 71,400 cases awaiting final decisions. Ramana has attributed this to Covid lockdowns and restrictions.

At an Independence Day function organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association, the CJI rued that in a 16-month span, the court was able to physically assemble for only 55 days. “It is just and natural for people to have high expectations, but regrettably, the forces of nature were against us,” said Ramana.

With Ramana vacating his post Friday, many advocates practising in the Supreme Court speak of him in largely glowing terms. His successor as CJI, Uday Umesh Lalit, is due to be sworn in on 27 August.

For Supreme Court advocate Pallavi Pratap, Ramana is the “most inspiring” Chief Justice of recent times.

“He brought normalcy post-lockdown, through a phased physical hearing, encouraged junior members of the Bar to argue their own matters, and promoted an e-filing system for fresh cases,” she said.

However, another SC advocate, Namit Saxena, said that although he appreciated the increase in judicial appointments during Ramana’s tenure and the CJI’s “excellent speeches and lectures” in this time, he was disappointed about the continuing pendency of important cases.

Advocate Ashwarya Sinha, also from the SC, echoed similar views. “His tenure as the CJI shall be perceived as a bitter-sweet one, which saw tireless efforts towards improvement in administration of justice on the one hand, while many critical cases of paramount national importance remained undecided,” Sinha said.

“There was a considerable gap between the expressions made during his public speeches and actual delivery of justice by the top court during Justice Ramana’s tenure,” Saxena said.

Here’s a look at some of the defining achievements — and shortfalls —  that have defined Ramana’s tenure as CJI.

Increase in judicial appointments

Ramana’s tenure witnessed a flurry of judicial appointments to the Supreme Court as well as the high courts, bringing vacancies down to their lowest level since 2016.

The collegium led by him made over 250 recommendations for the appointment of judges to high courts. It also reiterated names that were earlier returned by the government, some of which were finally cleared for appointments.

Fresh appointments were also made to the Supreme Court in a span of nine months. While nine judges were appointed in August 2021, four months after Ramana took over, the other two took their oaths in May this year.

The first nine judges included three women, one from the Scheduled Castes, and another belonging to the Other Backward Classes. One of the three women judges, Justice B.V. Nagarathna, will go on to become the first woman CJI in 2024.

This flurry of appointments is a feather in Ramana’s cap, given that his predecessor — S.A. Bobde — was unable to make a single appointment to the Supreme Court in his 17-month tenure.

The government also cleared the highest number of appointments during Ramana’s tenure, with 266 judges being appointed to high courts, compared to 104 appointments under Bobde and 107 during Ranjan Gogoi’s 13 months in office.

According to Ministry of Law and Justice data, there are 381 vacancies against the sanctioned strength of 1,108 judges in the high courts as of 1 July. In January and February this year, the number of vacancies stood at 411, while in March it was 387 and in April 391.

Administrative wins, and a grievance

Decisions taken on the administrative side that made Ramana a favourite of the Bar included permitting the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) to use the apex court’s auditorium for its official functions. The allocation of new chambers to eligible advocates was also appreciated.

Ramana also undertook innovative measures to bring in more accountability and transparency on the administrative side. He oversaw the implementation of ‘Fast and Secured Transmission of Electronic Records’, or FASTER, a digital platform to communicate interim orders, stay orders, bail orders etc of the apex court to the concerned authorities.

Apart from this, the CJI permitted the hybrid hearing of judicial matters and allowed exclusive online access to the media to attend court proceedings.

However, a grievance of the Bar that remained unaddressed during Ramana’s tenure was the manner in which cases were listed. Lawyers often complained of cases being deleted despite court orders directing their listing. This caused immense heartburn, forcing advocates to queue up every morning before Ramana’s court to complain about the practice.

Advocates ThePrint spoke to said they hoped the next CJI,  U.U. Lalit, who was promoted from the Supreme Court Bar to the Bench, will bring in the much-desired changes to streamline the system of listing cases.

Key judicial interventions

Ramana’s tenure included some important judicial interventions.

Within months of taking over as the CJI, the judge heard a batch of petitions in the Pegasus spyware scandal. In October, 2021 a bench led by him set up a panel to examine the allegations and carry out an enquiry into it. The bench made adverse comments on the Union government’s refusal to clearly state whether or not it used the spyware.

However, the case was finally taken up only this Thursday when the CJI’s bench read out the panel’s report in open court and then deferred its hearing by four weeks, without giving any orders.

Ramana’s bench also took a firm stance in the Lakhimpur Kheri case in which eight persons were killed by a four-wheeler belonging to Ashish Mishra, the son of Union minister Ajay Mishra. The bench cancelled the bail granted to Ashish Mishra, after lambasting the Uttar Pradesh government’s refusal to challenge the Allahabad High Court order that had granted bail.

Then, in May this year, Ramana’s bench suspended criminal trials and court proceedings under the British-era sedition law (Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code), while permitting the Union of India to reconsider the penal provision. This order came on a set of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the section, and after the Union government admitted the provision was abused and needed “re-examination”.

Ramana also took a tough stand in matters related to tribunal vacancies. He pulled up the Union government on several occasions over its reluctance to fast-track appointments in tribunals.

According to advocate Pallavi Pratap, Justice Ramana’s judgment on the value of a woman’s contribution to household labour, declaring it equivalent to the contribution of an office-going man, will be remembered as a path-breaking one.

Unheard constitutional matters

Critics pointed to the non-listing of several important constitutional matters related to the abolition of the special status of Jammu and Kashmir under Article 370 of the Constitution, as well as petitions challenging the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the legality of electoral bonds. These remained pending as they did during the time of his predecessors.

Sinha said that the CJI failed to take up cases of importance that were filed when he took over the top post. “The Supreme Court is seized of a significant number of Constitution Bench cases which are of far-reaching consequences. However, the fate of such crucial cases hangs in abeyance till date,” he pointed out.

Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, who represented petitioners in the hijab case, told ThePrint that despite mentioning it several times, the matter was never listed.

In spite of these issues, Sinha said Ramana’s efforts to resume the regular functioning of courts and get the system back on its feet, after months of shutdowns, were “commendable”.

(This is an updated version of the copy.)

(Edited by Asavari Singh)