New Delhi: Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai did not appreciate the decision of the two Supreme Court Bar bodies to refrain from organising a formal farewell party for Justice Bela Trivedi, whose last working day in office was Friday.
According to traditions, the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) hold farewell ceremonies to bid adieu to a retiring judge. SCAORA holds an event three to four days before the last working day of the judge. SCBA organises another on the day the judge demits office.
SCAORA represents advocates-on-record, who have the authority to sign petitions and all documents filed in the top court. SCBA is the body of practising lawyers of the apex court.
The official retirement of Justice Trivedi comes next month: 10 June. However, she is flying out of Delhi this weekend, so Friday became her last working day. According to the Supreme Court registry, Justice Trivedi plans to leave several days before the court breaks for a summer recess, starting 24 May.
“Summer vacation usually starts on 15 May. Hence, Justice Trivedi booked her tickets much in advance before the finalisation of the calendar for this year,” one of the sources said.
As is the custom in the SC, Justice Trivedi spent her last working day in the CJI court. The ceremonial bench, led by CJI B.R. Gavai and including justices Trivedi and Augustine Masih, heard a few matters. Then, senior Bar advocates and government law officers made short speeches, praising the retiring judge.
Before Bar members shared their experiences with her, CJI Gavai flagged that no farewell ceremony was held for Justice Trivedi, expressing discontentment. As in the cases of other judges, the Bar associations did not even notify the court of a farewell ceremony for her.
CJI Gavai, during the ceremonial bench hearing, conveyed his gratitude to senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Rachna Srivastava for their presence.
Sibal is president of SCBA, and Srivastava is vice-president.
“I am grateful to Mr Sibal and Rachana Srivastava that both are here. But, the stand of the association [SCBA], I must deprecate openly because I believe in being plain and straight,” he said.
Asserting that SCBA should not take such a stand, CJI Gavai said, “I am now openly appreciating Mr Sibal and Srivastava, that despite the resolution of the bodies, they are here.”
CJI Gavai added: “The presence of the full house here fully indicates the verdict is out—that she is quite a good judge. There are different types of judges, but that should not be a factor for doing what ought to have been done at 4.30 pm today (Friday).”
CJI Gavai also praised Justice Trivedi for her firmness, fearlessness, hard work, integrity and spirituality.
Justice Masih also voiced his concerns over Justice Trivedi not getting a farewell from any Bar association.
In tune with CJI Gavai, he said, “Traditions need following, and they are to be respected. I am sure good traditions should always continue. I wish, sister [Justice Trivedi], all the success in her life … I am sure she will be a mentor and guide to many.”
Also Read: As CJI Sanjiv Khanna demits office, a look at his 6-month tenure marked by reforms & timely justice
What the bar associations are saying
Speaking to ThePrint, SCBA secretary Vikrant Yadav clarified that the association never passed a resolution, refusing to accord farewell to Justice Trivedi, who, according to official records, is set for a 10 June retirement.
“The vacations commence on 24 May, unlike past years when 15 May was the day vacations started. Firstly, the SCBA always organises farewells for judges on their last official working day. And in cases where the retirement day of a judge falls during a vacation, the associations organise farewells on the last working day before the court shuts down for a break. In Justice Trivedi’s case, we did not know on 23 May that she would not be present. We learned about her travel plans days ago,” he said.
SCAORA members also denied passing any resolution, as mentioned by CJI Gavai. Speaking to ThePrint, on the condition of anonymity, an office-bearer of SCAORA said, “This year, we do not have complete vacation but partial working days. In the first week of the break this year, the top five judges will be holding court. On this account, we thought Justice Trivedi will be in town close to her retirement date, so we did not plan an event.”
Bar senior members seemed divided over Justice Trivedi not getting a customary send-off.
In a letter to the SCBA and SCAORA, Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman Manan Kumar Mishra urged the two associations to reconsider their decision to “disrupt the long-established tradition” of giving a farewell, which, he said, was a hallmark of the institutional respect and recognition for the distinguished service rendered by retiring judges.
Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, in a Facebook post, lauded the Bar for “spine” and “discernment”. Ramachandran, a Supreme Court Bar Association member for nearly five decades, said, “I can say with certainty that it (SCBA) has never been petty. Not only the strictest but also the rudest get farewells when they have retired.”
He recollected that apart from a few judges, who requested not to be given the Bar tea parties, the association refused farewells to only two justices. According to Ramachandran, after warm send-offs, grateful judges often say, “The Bar is the judge of judges.” He reminded judges to remember this adage when the Bar got “cold.”
Since September last year, Justice Trivedi has been highly critical of lawyers practising in the Supreme Court—especially an advocate-on-record—for their lackadaisical approach in handling cases.
On multiple occasions, she pulled them up for not following protocols while signing petitions, also taking a strong exception to their absence during hearings.
In one of her judgments, she specifically directed the advocates-on-record to mark only those lawyers who have the authority to appear and argue a case on a particular day as present. In the same order, she ordered a CBI inquiry against advocates in a case of alleged impersonation.
In response, SCBA and SCAORA wrote to the administrative side of the Supreme Court. They pointed out that the judgment was contrary to the settled practice of the court, as well as an overreach given the directions the court’s administrative side has issued from time to time.
In April this year, Justice Trivedi and the Bar exchanged harsh words after the judge pulled up one of the advocates-on-record for filing a vexatious petition in a criminal case. She threatened to proceed with contempt proceedings against the advocate, prompting senior Bar members to intervene.
The opposition she faced from the Bar was despite a landmark ruling she delivered in favour of lawyers. A Justice Trivedi-led bench had held that lawyers do not come under the ambit of the Consumer Protection Act, and hence, do not face prosecution under laws for protecting consumer interests.
(Edited by Madhurita Goswami)