New Delhi: Justice C.S. Karnan, who in 2017 became the first serving judge to be convicted for contempt, described the proceedings against advocate Prashant Bhushan as unconstitutional and said it was high time there was a transparent system in place to deal with corruption charges against sitting or retired judges.
In an interview to ThePrint, the former Madras and Calcutta High Courts judge argued that Bhushan’s tweets expressed his views on the existing situation prevailing in the judiciary. In doing so, he exercised his constitutional right to free speech and expression. The retired judge extended his support to Bhushan, even though the advocate was among those who welcomed the Supreme Court’s order to send Justice Karnan to jail for six months.
“Judges are not above the law. They are equally answerable to the public as members of other institutions. They are bound to follow the Indian Constitution and at the same time adopt a transparent working methodology. After all, they get their salaries from public taxes,” Justice Karnan said.
A constitution bench of seven judges led by then Chief Justice of India J.S. Khehar had on 9 May 2017 sentenced Karnan for contempt. The order came after months of a stand-off between him and the top court that saw the two sides issue a string of orders against each other. In one order, Justice Karnan had sentenced CJI Khehar to life imprisonment under the SC/ST Act for taking cognisance of the issue against him.
The controversy began after Justice Karnan, in January 2017, wrote a letter to the prime minister alleging corruption charges against sitting judges. The seven-judge bench began suo-motu contempt proceedings against him and, in February, pronounced him guilty.
On 10 March the court issued non-bailable warrants against Justice Karnan and withdrew his judicial work through an order after he refused to comply with the top court’s direction to appear personally in the proceedings.
Also read: India turned a blind eye to Justice Karnan, an ‘outsider’. Prashant Bhushan is different
‘Proceedings reflect inconsistency of top court’
After Justice Karnan was sentenced, Bhushan had tweeted: “Glad SC finally nailed Karnan for gross contempt of court. He made reckless charges on judges & then passed ‘absurd’ orders against SC judges.”
In a fresh tweet Friday, Bhushan reiterated his stand and said Justice Karnan, apart from making absurd allegations against his colleagues, had abused his judicial powers to jail top court judges.
Justice Karnan, however, declined to share his views on Bhushan’s comments against him, saying he was more concerned about the law. He also refused to comment on the lack of public outrage in his case, unlike the one witnessed in Bhushan’s case.
According to him the Indian Constitution is the parent law, which binds every citizen, including the judges. “When the parent law allows free speech, how can the courts prohibit it,” he asked.
Justice Karnan faulted the reasoning given by the court to convict Bhushan and said what the advocate has pointed out in his tweets were facts.
“I wonder how Bhushan broke the law with his statement and also which part of his tweet has brought insult to ‘milords,” the former judge said.
He was even critical of the different yardsticks adopted by the courts to decide contempt cases, saying it is a reflection of its inconsistent approach.
“In my case they constituted a seven-judge bench but in this (Bhushan) it’s three-judge. There are some cases where two-judges benches have heard contempt cases. This shows there is no fixed procedure followed to deal with contempt-of-court matters,” he said.
Also read: Karnan to continue ‘fight against caste discrimination’ after six months in jail
‘Need a system of open enquiry against judges’
Justice Karnan did not subscribe to the view taken by another three-judge bench led by Justice Arun Mishra, in a 2009 contempt case against Bhushan, that it must hear arguments on whether citizens should go public with corruption allegations against judges, especially since an in-house mechanism is there to deal with such complaints.
“I had made a complaint against 20 judges to the Prime Minister, who in return referred the complaint to Justice Khehar. On my complaint otherwise an enquiry was mandatory. But, the CJI chose to constitute a bench on the judicial side to act against me,” the judge said.
He gave other instances where inquiries under the in-house mechanism were either cut short or bore no results.
“Any criminal enquiry against a judge should be an open one. There should be transparency. Public has the right to know and must know what is happening in the judiciary,” he said.
Also read: 280-character tweet is all it takes to destroy Indian democracy — if you believe Supreme Court
1.. Does Free Speech mean Free Screech? Wild allegations not acceptable.
2. In House mechanism does not inspire any confidence if not transparent? What happened to the various complaints made against the Judges? Make it public.
In India it matters who express the concern rather than ideology behind the concern
Prashant Bhusan himself welcomed the judgement against the Justice Karnan and criticized him. Prashant Bhusan does not deserve public support
The despicable caste system created and bequeathed to us by the colonists (note: what we had was varnas and not castes) has taken the following form post independence: Judges-Brahmins, Advocates and other authorities- Vaishyas and the rest- sudras.
Complaint of Justice Karnan would have been looked by the Government.
That’s explain the current state in Supreme Court.
India is a democracy. The elected state Assembly, Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha are the ultimate custodians of the rights of the citizens. Even the courts are like any other pubic office. Where a situation arises whereby the disposal by a court of law is debated upon, it is but fair for the Assembly first and then the Lok Sabha and finally the Rajya Sabah to decide on upholding/ modifying . setting aside the stated disposals by the courts. There has to be checks and balances in the actions of those who hold public offices which is the beauty of democracy
In recent past we had seen the scenes of Supreme court judges coming out openly to address press and people, we also witnessed how the lists of recommendations for appointment of judges were withheld and the scene of a chief justice with folded hands asking for early clearance of appointments …we also saw the saga of a lady staff creating a storm ….well…. and now we see the sea of justice is calm and quiet. How beautiful it looks with a beautiful future…..dreams and aspirations.
Right to Freedom of Speech and previlege of Civil Liberties are not wholesale licences for the likes of Bhushan and Jarman to scandalise the Court or a judge. What Bhushan’ s perception of these rights is self-indulgent or illusory. The nub of the matter is that Bhushan’s tweets were explicitly abusive and scsndslous. Those tweets were not criticismbut outright abuse. The difference between critislcism and abuse of the preview is very subtle. His perception is subjective of these principles . His arrogance and assumptions of being a senior lawyer was that he was entitlef to use any unbridled unabashed language to comment upon judges and courts, which is the unfortunate trend in the lawyers of India. . He was wrong.As to Jarman, he was not only flagrantly guilty of contempt, but we’ll beneath contempt.
Alexis barrister
Next you would be articulating the views of Dawood Ibrahim! This judge was CONVICTED…his views should not be given publicity. However, this is what can be expected from a guy who tried to denigrate the Indian Army.
Has no freedom of expression like you.
A convict extending support to another convict. Not a big deal.
You people know only to ridicule!!!
He is right! He was proceeded against and made a scapegoat because he chose to fight corruption in judiciary and that to being Dalit. How the judiciary concluded that there was no substance in his allegations? Are all the judges above greed? If so why they are becoming Governors or aceepting other posts after retirement? Why Justice Gogoi became Rajya Sabha member?
Can we say that present set of judges will not accept any post after retirement?
History will record Prashant Bhushan as an honest activist who not only faught corruption during Congress regime, but also complete degradation of all institutions including judiciary by present Government.
This Fort is no longer looking impregnable. On CAA, a simple stay at the stage of admission – the Rules to make the law operational have still not been notified – could have avoided nationwide protests and the riots in north east Delhi. The UN human rights chief has sought to be impleaded in the matter to assist the SC, since the law is in conflict with India’s international obligations. The EU Parliament and the US Congress are monitoring the case, would be disappointed if an Ayodhya style verdict is delivered. 2. The law of contempt is one facet of the moral force of the institution. The Dalit lady staffer had sent copies of her affidavit to all the learned Judges of the SC. The fact that she has been reinstated in service – instead of being prosecuted for perjury – shows she was speaking the truth. It is remarkable that not a single Judge demurred over how Mr Gogoi was exonerated. In a democracy, citizens observe how power is exercised in practice. Fear of contempt and an accumulated regard for this fine institution stand in the way of their expressing themselves with more candour. Slowly those fetters will fall away.
Well stated.
ARE WE LIVING IN MOCK INDIA?
DONT CALL THIS FELLOW AS JUSTICE, HE WAS PUT IN JAIL FOR 6 MONTHS FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT
Wasn’t he a Judge? What is wrong with that?