Ex-CJI Balakrishnan denies charges; ADMK, BSP seek probe; Congress rubbishes claim
The stunning disclosure by former Supreme Court judge Markandeya Katju that three former Chief Justices of India succumbed to political pressure during the UPA-I Government to grant extensions to a “corrupt” Additional Judge of the Madras High Court has snowballed into a major controversy. Katju also alleged that the Manmohan Singh Government was blackmailed by one of its allies in this case.
While former Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan rejected Justice Katju’s claim, political parties came out with mixed reactions. The AIADMK and the BSP demanded a probe into the allegation, the Congress rubbished it, and the Shiv Sena and the CPI questioned the timing of Justice Katju’s revelation.
In both Houses of Parliament, members of AIADMK demanded immediate probe into Katju’s charge. Waiving copies of the newspaper that published Katju’s article, AIADMK MPs led by V Maitreyan stalled the proceedings in the Rajya Sabha. They sought a probe into the role played by its arch rival DMK in influencing the UPA Government to seek favour for the judge, who is reliably learnt to be Justice Ashok Kumar. He retired as judge of Andhra Pradesh High Court and is no more. Maitreyan wanted to know if former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who was seated in the House, was aware of the allegation against the judge and if his ally DMK had put pressure on his Government. In the lok Sabha, M Thambidurai (AIADMK) led the protest seeking a probe into this issue.
He asked the law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad to respond to the allegations and hold an enquiry as to who was the judge. He also raised the issue of pressure put up by the DMK on the UPA Government to help the judge. But Speaker Sumitra Mahajan said she cannot compel the Government to make a statement during Zero Hour.
The controversy related to a decision by SC Collegium on April 29, 2005 not to recommend Kumar’s extension as Additional Judge. But then CJI RC lahoti extended his tenure by one year on August 3, 2005. On August 3, 2006, then CJI YK Sabarwal, who was part of the same collegium of 2005, extended his term for six months on the ground that time was inadequate to obtain views of then Madras Chief Justice.
permanent judge by then CJI Balakrishnan. He was transferred to Andhra Pradesh HC from where he retired in 2009.
Defending the charge against him, former CJI KG Balakrishnan told The Pioneer, “I got satisfactory reports from successive Chief Justices of the Madras High Court, on which I acted.” Balakrishnan, who currently heads National Human Rights Commission, was accused by Katju of “improper compromises” in making Justice Kumar a permanent judge.
Justifying his decision, Balakrishnan said, “There was some allegation that he (Kumar) was favouring or was close to some persons of the ruling party in the State. I transferred him to the Andhra Pradesh High Court. We do not think the allegations were of grave irregularity unless there is any instance to show any political favour being done.”
Justice Balakrishnan also rubbished charge of political interference as “baseless” and “silly”. He said, “There is no political pressure or any Government pressure at all. It would never happen. Unless the report from Chief Justice of the HC is received, we do not decide. These are silly allegations.”
Katju had alleged that Justice lahoti extended the tenure of Justice Kumar as Additional Judge after a UPA Minister approached him. The article suggested that the judge was close to UPA’s southern ally, DMK, which threatened to pull down the Government on the issue.
Justice lahoti also denied any wrongdoing. Speaking to a news channel, he said, “Everything is a matter of record. Whatever I have done or not done is all on record with reasons. I have never done anything wrong in my life.”
Former UPA Minister and senior Congress leader HR Bhardwaj, who was the law Minister at the relevant time, confirmed that the judge in question was backed by a large group of MPs who complained about Justice Katju’s opposition. “Around 18 SC/ST MPs met PM Manmohan Singh in 2004 and complained about injustice to the accused additional judge,” Bhardwaj told a news channel, adding, “ultimately, the Chief Justice of India cleared the appointment.”
Justice Kumar’s appointment as HC judge was also challenged by two senior advocates Shanti Bhushan and Kamini Jaiswal. On their writ petition, SC ordered on December 17, 2008 that no order could be passed as “the clock cannot be put back.” However, it recorded the undisputed position on facts that the collegium which found Justice Kumar unsuitable later granted him extensions and even made him permanent.
Balakrishnan raised queries about Justice Katju’s inaction against the judge while he was Chief Justice of Madras High Court. “He should have taken steps for the impeachment of the judge. He (the judge) has passed away since and to speak ill of him now is unfortunate. During his (Katju’s) tenure (as CJ of the Madras HC) he (Katju) could have withdrawn judicial work or written to the CJI for action.”
The former CJI even wondered if IB reports were sought against sitting judges. “Performance of a judge is assessed by the report sent by the Chief Justice of the High Court. In this case, successive CJs of Madras HC had given satisfactory reports,” Balakrishnan said, adding, he did not intend to proceed legally against Justice Katju.
Meanwhile, BSP chief Mayawati termed the charges as serious and demanded a probe into them. “The allegations levelled by Katju are serious and I think they should be investigated. If there is any element of truth in them, there should be action. There should not be any political interference in the appointment of judges,” she told reporters.
Congress leaders trashed the allegations, saying they had no relevance and it was just an attempt by Katju to remain in news and “come close to the present government”. “After more than a decade, you are raising this issue....It has no relevance. I take it as an attempt to defame judiciary,” party leader Rajiv Shukla said.
Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut and D Raja of the CPI questioned the timing of allegations and wondered what Katju did when the alleged corrupt judge was elevated.