On the day, the four judges of the Supreme Court revolted against the Chief Justice of India (CJI) over arbitrarily assigning high profile cases to specific Benches, the CJI revived a five-member Constitution Bench to hear eight sensitive cases, including Aadhaar, law on adultery, homosexuality, and life ban on convicted politicians. Interestingly, none of the four rebel judges find place in this Bench.
The judges present with the CJI are the same who had earlier heard and reserved judgment on politically sensitive cases, including legal battle between the Delhi Government and the Centre on executive control over Delhi, and a plea to recognise euthanasia or living will of a terminally ill patient.
Monday was another usual day at the court with no sign of a thaw between the four judges and the CJI. A routine tea meeting did take place in the morning a little before the judges proceeded to their respective courts. It was not known whether the issue was discussed during the meeting. Although judges remained tight-lipped over the issue, Attorney General of India KK Venugopal and Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman Manan Kumar Mishra claimed that the matter appeared to be “settled” amicably. However, there was no confirmation from judges in this regard.
The circular setting up the five-judge Bench was issued on January 12.
The circular lists a total of eight cases before a five-judge Bench comprising CJI Dipak Misra, Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, and Ashok Bhushan.
In October last year, the Bench with the same composition was constituted to decide five crucial constitutional issues that includes challenge to Article 239AA of Constitution (tussle for power between Centre and Delhi claiming executive control over Capital), question whether Parliamentary Standing Committee reports can be the basis for filing PIls, and the validity of a ‘living will’ — an advance declaration for mercy killing by a terminally ill patient before slipping into a vegetative state.
Decision in these five cases has either been pronounced or judgment is awaited. It is at this juncture, a set of eight equally sensitive and high-profile cases have been directed to the same bench. While composition of a bench is the sole prerogative of the CJI, the listing of these eight cases before a set of same judges shows that nothing seems to hacve changed as far allotment of cases are concerned post the judges'press conference last week.
But Attorney General KK Venugopal on Monday referred to the morning tea meeting to suggest, “Everything has been settled is what I believe…Everything is under control.” When asked if he met any of the judges, Venugopal said ‘no’.
A little later, BCI held a Press conference led by its chairman and announced that the issue between the judges was sorted out. A team of seven members, including BCI chairman had visited, 15 judges of the Supreme Court including CJI on this issue. He said, “Kahani khatam ho gaya” (the story is now over)…We met 15 judges and all have assured that issues have been resolved.”