Whenever I find myself in trouble, I find the solution in the Constitution, says SC judge Gupta at the inaugural lecture of the Supreme Court Bar Association. Read his full speech here.
Supreme Court judge Deepak Gupta says dissent today is seen as anti-national, but govt and country are two different things; calls for judiciary to be impartial in decision-making.
While the CBI has built its reputation as a premier crime investigation agency by cracking high profile cases, many other cases have remained unresolved or resulted in acquittals.
India’s industrial output growth saw a 10-month low in June, with Index of Industrial Production (IIP) growing by mere 1.5% as against 1.9% in May 2025.
Standing up to America is usually not a personal risk for a leader in India. Any suggestions of foreign pressure unites India behind who they see as leading them in that fight.
Justice Guptha speaks more after retirement,rather airing it within the judiciary,and supporting National judicial commission,condemning, press conference held by four judges knocking the doors of S.C during midnight.
Given the constitutional frame work it is obvious that the four pillars of the democracy cannot and will not see a qualitative change unless it comes from within. “NA KHAUNGA NA KHANE DUNGA” has to come from the top most of the pillar.
Everyone enjoys the position and gives the opinions at the time of departure having done nothing to set it right while in the system.
1.I have consistently held the view that dissent is one of the most important aspects of democracy. “The democracy is the rule by the majority, after hearing the dissent. If the dissenters cannot get the support of the majority, they need to accept the reality and think.”
2. The district judiciary needs to be trained in this regard” why not be punished for not honoring the SC judgments.”
3.In my view, the process for appointment of judges to the high courts and the Supreme Court needs to be strengthened. ” will fixing time lines solve the problem?”
4.In my view, there needs to be some sort of policy of the court to decide which matters should be entertained in the highest court and which should not, and broad guidelines can be laid down in a full court meeting. We must remember that the Supreme Court is not meant to correct the mistakes of the high court. The Supreme Court should normally only interfere when substantial questions of law are involved. In the absence of a court policy, all judges take their individual views, which leads to some confusion.
SIR, WHO WILL ADDRESS THE POINTS RAISED BY HIS LORDSHIP?
This judge is as hypocritical or even more than, the often discredited holy men. He speaks of making the selection of judges more robust, when as is common knowledge, there is corruption, nepotism and extraneous reasons for collegium selection. The general public are fast loosing their respect and belief iñ the higher courts.
The Collegium is unconstitutional and the apex court trashing the NJAC Act is illegal. Period.
Justice Guptha speaks more after retirement,rather airing it within the judiciary,and supporting National judicial commission,condemning, press conference held by four judges knocking the doors of S.C during midnight.
Given the constitutional frame work it is obvious that the four pillars of the democracy cannot and will not see a qualitative change unless it comes from within. “NA KHAUNGA NA KHANE DUNGA” has to come from the top most of the pillar.
Everyone enjoys the position and gives the opinions at the time of departure having done nothing to set it right while in the system.
1.I have consistently held the view that dissent is one of the most important aspects of democracy. “The democracy is the rule by the majority, after hearing the dissent. If the dissenters cannot get the support of the majority, they need to accept the reality and think.”
2. The district judiciary needs to be trained in this regard” why not be punished for not honoring the SC judgments.”
3.In my view, the process for appointment of judges to the high courts and the Supreme Court needs to be strengthened. ” will fixing time lines solve the problem?”
4.In my view, there needs to be some sort of policy of the court to decide which matters should be entertained in the highest court and which should not, and broad guidelines can be laid down in a full court meeting. We must remember that the Supreme Court is not meant to correct the mistakes of the high court. The Supreme Court should normally only interfere when substantial questions of law are involved. In the absence of a court policy, all judges take their individual views, which leads to some confusion.
SIR, WHO WILL ADDRESS THE POINTS RAISED BY HIS LORDSHIP?
This judge is as hypocritical or even more than, the often discredited holy men. He speaks of making the selection of judges more robust, when as is common knowledge, there is corruption, nepotism and extraneous reasons for collegium selection. The general public are fast loosing their respect and belief iñ the higher courts.