NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday has taken note of the newspaper reports of a speech given by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, a sitting judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
The apex court has called for the details and particulars from the High Court and the matter is under consideration, official sources said.
SC Steps In: Allahabad HC Judge’s Remarks Spark Judicial Ethics Debate
However, it was not disclosed whether the matter was under consideration whether on administrative or judicial side.
On judicial side, the apex court may register a suo motu case and issue an order. But on administrative side, the Supreme Court can in extreme cases withdraw judicial work from the judge.
In his speech in a programme organised by VHP in High Court's library on December 8, Justice Yadav said, India will function as per the wishes of the majority community, and that the welfare and happiness of the majority overrides those of others. He was in fact highlighting the fact that India was a democracy.
Uniform Civil Code Controversy: SC Seeks Clarification on HC Judge’s Speech
"I have no hesitation in stating that this is Hindustan, and this country will function according to the wishes of the majority living here. This is the law. It is not about speaking as a High Court Judge; rather, the law operates in accordance with the bahusankyak (majority)," Justice Yadav had said, indicating towards parliamentary democracy.
An NGO, Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) through its convenor Prashant Bhushan, however, wrote a letter to Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna seeking an “in-house enquiry” into the conduct of Justice Yadav of the Allahabad High Court.
The NGO claimed the speech breached judicial ethics and violated the constitutional principles of impartiality and secularism.
In his remarks, the judge had said the main aim of the Uniform Civil Code is to promote social harmony, gender equality, and secularism.
"The main objective of the Uniform Civil Code is to promote social harmony, gender equality and secularism by eliminating unequal legal systems based on different religions and communities," he had said.
"A Uniform Civil Code refers to a common law that applies to all religious communities in personal matters such as marriage, inheritance, divorce, adoption etc," the judge had said.
In the letter, Bhushan said Justice Yadav delivered a speech endorsing the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) while making controversial remarks perceived as targeting the Muslim community.
The CJAR said that Justice Yadav’s participation in the VHP event and his comments constitute judicial impropriety and breach the solemn oath to uphold the Constitution impartially.
Bhushan claimed, the remarks undermined the judiciary's role as a neutral arbiter and erode public trust in its independence.
Senior advocate and SC Bar Association president Kapil Sibal sought support from the BJP MPs to initiate impeachment proceedings against the judge.
The judge had also said, “In our country, we are taught not to harm even the smallest animals, not to kill ants, and this lesson is ingrained in us. Perhaps that is why we are tolerant and compassionate; we feel pain when others suffer. But you do not have this. Why? Here, children are born, and from childhood, they are guided towards God, taught Vedic mantras, and told about non-violence. But in your culture, from a young age, children are exposed to the slaughter of animals. How can you expect them to be tolerant and compassionate?”
This observation was also seen as targetting the Muslim community over their practices.
