‘Balakrishnan tarnished image of judiciary’

New Delhi, June 5 — The stubbornness with which Justice K.G Balakrishnan, who retired as Chief Justice of India last month, opposed the implementation of the Right to Information in the judiciary has damaged the image of the institution, according to rebellious judge D.V. Shylendra Kumar. In one of the strongest attacks by any judge across the country on Justice Balakrishnan, who is set to take over as the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chief on Monday, Justice Kumar held him responsible for further eroding the faith of the people in the judiciary. “Justice Balakrishnan, in an adamant manner, not only refused to divulge information on the functioning of the Supreme Court on the administrative side, but also tried to stonewall the judicial opinion expressed by the Delhi High Court in holding it (SC) amenable to part with information under RTI,” he wrote on his blog. “This stubborn attitude greatly damaged the image of judiciary in the country, and the already eroding faith and confidence of the people in the judicial system only got further reduced in the wake of such an attitude on the part of the former CJI,” Justice Kumar wrote. The only active blogger judge in the country’s higher judiciary, Kumar, in an open letter to the country’s citizens, has also taken a dig at Supreme Court judges, saying the top court of India is one of the most powerful in the world but not necessarily correct.

The judge wanted to know if Justice Balakrishnan had the details of judges’ assets since 1997, when the judges of the top court passed a resolution to do so, and what prevented him from making these public the day after the announcement.

Kapadia takes over as new Chief Justice of India

New Delhi, May 12 (NAI): Justice S H Kapadia was on Wednesday sworn-in as the 38th Chief Justice of India (CJI).

President Pratibha Devisingh Patil administered the oath of office and secrecy to Justice Kapadia.

The event at Rashtrapati Bhawan was attended by the Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, his cabinet colleagues, outgoing Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and other dignitaries.

Born in September 29, 1947, Kapadia enrolled as an advocate in September 1974.

Appointed as an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court in October 1991, Kapadia was elevated as a Permanent Judge in the same High Court in March 1993.

He was associated with a historical judgement in which a five-judge Constitutional Bench had held that the law put in the Ninth Schedule was open for judicial review.

He was served as the Chief Justice of the Uttaranchal High Court from October 5, 2003 to December of the same year.

He was elevated to the Supreme Court on December 18, 2003. (ANI)

VHP activists protest against Supreme Court”s verdict on live-in relationships

New Delhi, Mar 29 (ANI): Activists of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) on Monday staged a protest here against the Supreme Court for citing the example of the relationship of Hindu god Lord Krishna with his consort Radha to corroborate its judgment on live-in relationships.

The protestors asked the apex court to take back its observation.

“The observation made by it (apex court) regarding Radha-Krishna has hurt the sentiments of billions of Hindus. We request the Supreme Court that it should withdraw this comment from the final verdict. It should take back its observation,” said Swadesh Pal Gupta, Delhi VHP President.

The Supreme Court had on March 23 threw its weight behind live-in relationships, observing that for a man and a woman in love, to live together is part of the right to life, and not a “criminal offence”.

“If two people, man and woman, want to live together, who can oppose them? What is the offence they commit here? This happens because of the cultural exchange between people,” a special three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) K G Balakrishnan and Justices Deepak Verma and B S Chauhan observed.

“If living together is an offence, then the first complaint should be filed against the Supreme Court, because we have permitted living together,” the court said, referring to a 2006 judgment in which the Supreme Court directed the administration and police across the country to protect runaway couples from harassment, and to initiate action against those resorting to violence.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by actress Khusboo to quash the 22 FIRs filed against her by Tamil activist groups and forums for her alleged comments on pre-marital sex in interviews five years ago.

The VHP, founded in 1964, is an ideological ally of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). (ANI)

Manmohan Singh not in tune with Sonia Gandhi over RTI

New Delhi, Mar 5 (ANI): Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh has reportedly disagreed with Congress President Sonia Gandhi over the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

As per news channels, Dr Singh is in favour of excluding the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) from falling under the ambit of the RTI Act, whereas Sonia Gandhi has opposed any amendments in the Act.

The changes proposed by the Prime Minister in the RTI Act will keep the office of the Chief Justice of India out of the purview of the Act.

There are reports that Dr Singh has written a letter to Congress President saying that some changes are needed in the RTI Act to address the concerns of the judiciary.

A leading news channel on Thursday night reported that Sonia Gandhi wrote to Dr Singh two months ago that she was determined that there should be no amendments to the Act and the existing RTI Act should be put into operation appropriately.

The channel further reported that Dr Singh in his reply said there was a need for RTI amendments, but all stakeholders would be consulted prior to making any alteration.

There are reports that the Chief Justice of India (CJI), K G Balakrishnan, wrote a letter to Dr Singh in November 2009 expressing concern over the possible consequences of bringing his office into the purview of the RTI Act. (ANI)

I have the right to speak on the judiciary: CJI

New Delhi, Aug 24 (ANI): Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan on Monday called the Karnataka High Court Judge D.V. Shylendra Kumar’s move to declare his own assets as a publicity strategy, and reiterated his right to speak on matters related to the judiciary.

“He wants publicity and such a thing is not good for a judge. Judges should not be publicity-crazy,” Chief Justice Balakrishnan said.

The Chief Justice of India refuted charges that he was against judges making their assets public.

“The public has a right to know what is happening in the judiciary and I am telling them. I stand by what I have said on disclosure of assets by judges, and No one can stop them (Judges) if they chose to do so,” he said.

Earlier, Justice Kumar had said the chief justice of India did not have the authority to speak on behalf of all judges.

“I have the authority to speak in favour of judiciary,” Balakrishnan said.

Earlier senior lawyer Harish Salve said, while he agreed with Justice Kumar’s view that judges should publicly declare their assets, his criticism of the Chief Justice was not in order.(ANI)

Fall in civil suits, rise in criminal cases disturbing: CJI

New Delhi, April 10 (IANS) Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan said there is a new ‘disturbing’ litigation trend in the country – a fall in civil disputes but a rise in criminal cases.

‘Criminal cases have witnessed a three percent rise while there has been six percent decrease in civil cases… This is a disturbing trend,’ the chief justice said late Thursday evening, while inaugurating a function to mark the beginning of the golden jubilee celebrations of the Bar Association of India.

Elaborating upon the new trend, Chief Justice Balakrishnan said: ’87 percent of the total cases pending in India are in the subordinate courts, of which 71 percent are criminal cases.’

In states with higher literacy level, the number of civil cases was 29 per 1,000 people while in states with poor literacy it was as low as 4.6 per 1,000, he said.

Describing the number of civil cases filed as ‘very low’, the CJI wondered why people were not coming forward to file civil suits.

He appealed to the lawyers and legal community to ponder over this issue and help genuine and needy litigants in getting justice at an affordable cost.

The CJI also rued that in recent years there had been some instances of collusion between the defence and prosecution counsel in criminal cases.

The chief justice also disapproved of the astronomical fees being charged by the lawyers from clients and asked them to improve their ethical standards instead and help youngsters during their initial years in the legal profession.

Justice Balakrishnan said statutory bodies like the Bar Council of India and other state bar councils often take too much time in deciding complaints of professional misconduct against advocates.

The CJI wanted the Bar Association of India to set up a panel comprising judges, advocates, academics and others to take up legal research.

Later, BAI secretary Lalit Bhasin said the association had already initiated the process for establishing such a panel.

Sixty new CBI courts to be set up

NEW DELHI: Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan on Thursday announced the setting up of 60 new CBI courts across the country to expedite disposal
of cases involving the agency.

“Sixty new CBI courts will be set up across the country. A recent survey shows 9,000 cases involving CBI are pending in various courts,” Justice Balakrishnan said while delivering the 10th D P Kohli Memorial lecture on Criminal Justice System — Growing Responsibility in the Face of Challenges in Modern Society.

Justice Balakrishnan said criminal law provisions needed to be examined in a fresh light so as to accommodate the logic of punishment as well as compensation. A majority of punitive remedies enumerated in the statutes, such as fines, penalties and imprisonment, were not proportionate to the degree of harm suffered by the victim.

He also emphasised that if the extent of compensation had to bear a rational correlation to the actual harm suffered, the trial judge would need to make a thorough inquiry into the nature and degree of such harm. “There is obvious question about the source of funds for granting compensation to the victims,” he added.

“I am quite optimistic that the proposed changes will definitely improve the role and status of victims in the criminal justice system. The larger agenda of criminal justice reform touches on many more issues — such as better training for police personnel, a clear separation between the investigation and prosecution functions and continuous education for lawyers and judges,” the CJI said.

He cautioned though that if failures of criminal justice system were allowed to continue, they would only encourage offenders to commit more crimes and correspondingly lead to acts of vigilante justice. He also said an efficient yet fair criminal justice system was an essential requirement for a liberal democracy and these issues should be at the forefront of the agenda of all political parties.

CJI announces 60 new CBI courts across India

New Delhi, Apr 2 (ANI): The Chief Justice of India K. G. Balakrishnan on Thursday announced to set up 60 new Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) courts across the country.

“A recent survey shows 9000 cases involving the CBI are pending in various courts. After keeping that on mind, 60 new CBI courts will be set up across the country,” Balakrishnan said while delivering the 10th D. P. Kohli Memorial Lecture here.

The lecture was based on the “Criminal Justice System- Growing Responsibility in the face of Challenges in modern Society”.

The lecture is organized annually by the CBI since 2000 in honour of its founder-director (Late) D. P. Kohli, who headed the Special Police Establishment and the agency from 1955 to 1968. (ANI)

TN violence: CJI gets interim report

In the latest development in the Madras High Court violence, Justice Sri Krishna submitted his interim report on violence to the Chief Justice of India on Thursday.

The Supreme Court will examine the report on Friday and pass orders for action on those involved in the violence.

The apex court had appointed Justice Sri Krishna, a retired judge of the SC, to probe what had led to police-lawyer clash at Madras High Court on February 19. Large number of lawyers, a judge and some policemen were injured in the clash. A police station in the high court campus was also burnt.

HC defers hearing on plea on declaration of judges’ assets

New Delhi, Feb 27 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Friday deferred hearing on a petition filed by the Supreme Court challenging a Central Information Commission (CIC) order directing that assets of the judges should be made public.

Justice S. Ravinder Bhat adjourned the matter and posted it for further hearing on March 17.

The Supreme Court in its affidavit had said declaration of assets by its judges to the Chief Justice is “personal” information, which cannot be revealed under the Right to Information Act.

In its affidavit the apex court made it clear that its judges are not opposed to declaring their assets but there is no legal obligation to do so.

The seven-page affidavit was filed in response to a reply of an RTI applicant who pleaded that all information given to CJI comes within public domain and that he cannot be denied such information.

The apex court had said the judges are not averse to declaring their assets but there should be a proper law with proper safeguard to prevent misuse of such information.

The Court had on January 19 stayed the order of the CIC that the office of Chief Justice of India comes within the ambit of the RTI Act and information given to CJI has to be revealed to the RTI applicant. (ANI)

HC defers hearing on plea on declaration of judges’ assets

New Delhi, Feb 27 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Friday deferred hearing on a petition filed by the Supreme Court challenging a Central Information Commission (CIC) order directing that assets of the judges should be made public.

Justice S. Ravinder Bhat adjourned the matter and posted it for further hearing on March 17.

The Supreme Court in its affidavit had said declaration of assets by its judges to the Chief Justice is “personal” information, which cannot be revealed under the Right to Information Act.

In its affidavit the apex court made it clear that its judges are not opposed to declaring their assets but there is no legal obligation to do so.

The seven-page affidavit was filed in response to a reply of an RTI applicant who pleaded that all information given to CJI comes within public domain and that he cannot be denied such information.

The apex court had said the judges are not averse to declaring their assets but there should be a proper law with proper safeguard to prevent misuse of such information.

The Court had on January 19 stayed the order of the CIC that the office of Chief Justice of India comes within the ambit of the RTI Act and information given to CJI has to be revealed to the RTI applicant. (ANI)