In the wake of uproar over Allahabad High Court Judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav’s recent comments on Uniform Civil Code and that India will be run by the majority at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) function, retired Supreme Court judge Justice A K Pattnaik tells Suchitra Kalyan Mohanty that a judge shouldn’t express views on political matters at a public forum.
Excerpts:
What’s your take on Justice Yadav’s comment?
He (Justice Yadav) should not have expressed his views on political matters at a public meeting. It was incorrect to do so. He may have his views on certain matters, but shouldn’t express in a public platform.
Do you think Justice Yadav broke rules mandating judges to maintain impartiality, equality and restraint in their judgments as well as outside the court?
Justice Yadav has taken oath to uphold the Constitution. He has acted against the oath by expressing his opinion against a religious community. Has he forgotten that he is a judge? He crossed his boundaries.
At least 55 MPs have signed a joint petition in the Rajya Sabha to impeach Justice Yadav…
It was expected of the 55 MPs to initiate a move to impeach Justice Yadav. The Constitution provides that a judge can be removed only by an order of the President, based on a motion passed by both Houses of Parliament. To initiate proceedings, at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha may submit a signed petition to the Speaker, or 50 members of the Rajya Sabha may give a signed notice to the Chairman. The Speaker or Chairman may consult individuals and examine relevant material related to the notice. Based on this, he/she may decide to either admit the motion or refuse it.
Do you feel his comments warrant impeachment?
His impeachment is warranted as his comments amount to misbehaviour by a judge.
Has Justice Yadav crossed the ‘Lakshman Rekha’?
Yes, he has commented against the minority community and politically sensitive matters. He is a judge, he should not have expressed his views on political matters, and that too at a public meeting.
Judges have to follow Standard Operating Procedures by adhering to rules. However, it seems that some judges often speak on political issues…
Some judges often talk on politically sensitive issues, which must be avoided. A judge has to pass orders.
A litigant looks up to the judiciary for justice. In the wake of controversy over Justice Yadav’s comments, can people still expect impartial justice?
These comments by any judge erode the faith of common man in the judiciary. Judges under any circumstances should not go out of the way and follow the SOP.
Do you think the time has come for the judiciary to strengthen SOP for strict rules and even punishment?
Judges are well aware of the rules. Persons with religious prejudices and with strong political inclinations should not be appointed as judges. The rights of minority are protected by the Constitution, and so, a judge cannot violate those.
Currently, the only punishment for a permanent judge is impeachment. The punishment for an additional judge is that he/she must not be confirmed.
What is the process for impeachment?
First, the House investigates through an inquiry. Second, the House of Representatives must pass, by a simple majority of those present and voting, articles of impeachment, which constitute the formal allegations. Upon passage, the defendant has been impeached.
The procedure relating to the removal of an High Court or Supreme Court judge is regulated by the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968, by the process of impeachment. The removal motion of an SC judge can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha.
The President can issue the removal order after an address by Parliament, supported by a simple majority of each House.