38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, July 23, 2024

Judges not Above Law, SC Action on Prashant Bhushan was Unconstitutional, Says Ex- Calcutta High Court Judge, Justice Karnan

By RISHA DIXIT      25 August, 2020 04:55 PM      0 Comments
Judges not Above Law, SC Action on Prashant Bhushan was Unconstitutional, Says Ex- Calcutta High Court Judge, Justice Karnan

Ex Culcatta High court Judge, C.S. Karnan, who became the first judge to be held guilty for contempt of court in 2017, has described the proceedings of SC against Prashant Bhushan unconstitutional in an interview. 

On 9 May 2017, a constitution bench of seven judges, led by then CJI J.S. Kehar has sentenced Justice Karnan for contempt of Court. The order came after a one-month stand-off between justice Karnan and the top court that saw the two sides were accusing each other and had passed an order against each other. In one order, Justice Karnan had sentenced CJI Kehar for life imprisonment under the SC/ST Act taking the cognizance of the issue against him. 

In January 2017, Justice Karnan wrote a letter to Prime Minister alleging the sitting bench of Judges for corruption and due to these allegations against them, judges took Suo moto proceedings against him and declared him guilty in February. On March 10, the bench issued a non-bailable warrant against Justice Karnan and withdrew him from all his judicial work after Justice Karnan did not comply with the courts order when he was asked to be present personally in the proceedings. 

In an interview, Justice Karnan said that Bhushan just expressed his views about the conditions prevailing in the judiciary. He also said that Bhushan has exercised his rights to speech and expression and extended his support to Bhushan even though Bhushan was one of the lawyers who welcomed the court's decision in Justice Karnans Contempt of Court case.

After Justice Karnan was sentenced to jail for 6 months complying to the Courts order, Bhushan Tweeted, Glad SC finally nailed Karnan for gross contempt of court. He made reckless charges on judges & then passed absurd orders against SC judges.

But in a new Tweet, 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 in the interview when asked about the Prashant Bhushan case said, Judges are not above the law. They are equally answerable to the public as a member of the other institution. They are bound to follow the Indian Constitution and at the same time adopt a transforming working methodology. After all, they got their salaries from public taxes.

However, Justice Karnan declined to share his view on the comment of Prashant Bhushan against him by saying that he was more concerned about the law. He also refused to comment on the lack of public outrage in his case, unlike the Bhushans case. He also said that when the parent law allows the free speech how can the judges prohibit it? According to him, the Indian Constitution binds everyone including the judges. He also faulted the reasoning by the court against Prashant Bhushan and said What Bhushan pointed out in his tweet were the facts. 

He also said, I wonder how Bhushan broke the law with his statement and also which part of his tweet has brought insult to milords. In my case, they constituted a seven-judge bench but in this (Bhushan) its 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, and by saying this he criticized the different yardsticks followed by the top court for proceedings of contempt of court cases. 

Justice Karnan did not subscribe to the view taken by the three-judge bench led by Justice Arun Mishra in 2009 for the contempt of court against Prashant Bhushan, that it must hear argument on whether a citizen should go public with corruption allegations against judges, especially when there is an in-house mechanism to deal with such problems. 

He also said, 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 inquiry was mandatory. But the CJI chose to constitute a bench on the judicial side to act against me. Any criminal inquiry against a judge should be an open one. There should be transparency. The public has the right to know and must know what is happening in the judiciary. he said this on the view that whether the in-house inquiries bore any result or action. 

Share this article:

Leave a feedback about this

Trending Judiciary
SC halts directive mandating name displays for hotel owners during Kanwar Yatra [Read Order]

The Supreme Court halts directives mandating name plates for hotel owners during Kanwar Yatra, citing concerns over exclusion and economic boycott.

22 July, 2024 02:53 PM
Trending Judiciary
MP High Court calls for Uniform Civil Code, says “it needs to become a reality”

Madhya Pradesh High Court emphasizes the need for a Uniform Civil Code, highlighting its importance in combating superstitious practices and strengthening national integrity.

22 July, 2024 03:19 PM


Trending Judiciary
State govt has got no power to tinker with list of Scheduled Castes: Supreme Court [Read Judgement]

The Supreme Court ruled that state governments lack the authority to modify the Scheduled Castes lists, a power reserved exclusively for Parliament under Article 341.

17 July, 2024 09:31 AM
Trending Judiciary
SC asks Telangana govt to replace judge in Commission of Inquiry into power pact by previous govt

SC directs Telangana govt to replace Justice L Narasimha Reddy in Commission of Inquiry probing former CM KCR's alleged power sector irregularities.

17 July, 2024 09:40 AM
Trending Judiciary
Centre notifies appointments Justice N Kotiswar Singh, Justice Mahadevan as SC judges

Centre notifies appointments of Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice R Mahadevan as Supreme Court judges, marking the first SC judge from Manipur.

17 July, 2024 09:57 AM
Trending Judiciary
Imprisonment till rising of court not proper sentence for serious offence of bigamy: SC [Read Judgement]

The Supreme Court ruled that “imprisonment till the rising of the court" is not appropriate for bigamy, a serious offence, stressing the need for proportionate punishment.

17 July, 2024 10:00 AM


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email