Former Chief Justice of India Justice DY Chandrachud is again in the headlines and the reason for this is the claims of his former colleague Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.
Justice Kaul has mentioned in an interview an incident recorded in his upcoming book 'Without Fear or Favour'.
In this he claimed that former Chief Justice DY Chandrachud used to discuss the proposed names for appointment of judges in the Supreme Court Collegium with the government even before formal discussion on them.
According to Justice Kaul, he did not like this method and it was like taking prior 'approval' from the government.
However, on Justice Kaul's claims, Chandrachud told 'Indian Express' that it is difficult to comment on what Sanjay Kaul has said and in what context because he has not yet read his book.
On Justice Kaul's statement, Congress has said that Justice Kaul's book has raised serious questions on the independence of the judiciary during the tenure of Modi government.
Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh accused the central government of 'pressuring the judiciary and weakening its independence'.
Justice Kaul has given this interview to senior journalist Karan Thapar regarding his book.
He said in this interview, "During the collegium meeting, Chief Justice Chandrachud took him to a separate meeting and asked if he should call him to get the government's opinion on the proposed appointments."
Justice Kaul said that he told the then Chief Justice Chandrachud that this should not be done during the discussion on names in the collegium.
Justice Kaul claimed that the collegium had agreed on five names. But Chief Justice Chandrachud wanted a sixth name also to be approved, which was put forward at the last moment.
Justice Kaul and other members of the collegium were not ready for this.
Justice Kaul said, "They may have already taken some kind of approval from the government for the other names, including the sixth name."
When Thapar asked in the interview whether Chief Justice Chandrachud had already sought approval from the government before the collegium's decision, Justice Kaul replied, "Unfortunately, it has become a practice to discuss the names and have some kind of interaction with the government beforehand. This has been happening. I think this has been happening before and after Chief Justice Chandrachud as well. That is what troubles me."
Disagreeing with the concept of taking "approval" from the government beforehand, Justice Kaul said that consulting the government after the collegium's decision is a different matter.
During the interview, Thapar read an excerpt from Justice Kaul's upcoming book.
It reads, "There is a difference between deliberations and the process that I had come to consider as taking prior approval. That is, taking the consent of the government even before a formal discussion takes place in the collegium. This sends a wrong message."
Thapar also referred to Justice Kaul's comment in the book that "Chandrachud was overly lenient with the government on appointments."
When Justice Kaul was asked whether this attitude of the then Chief Justice Chandrachud was weakening the collegium system, he said, "He believed that this process was already going on like this. I believed that if a Chief Justice with a two-year tenure does this, then it will be difficult for the Chief Justice coming after him not to follow this practice. Their tenures are short and before appointments to the Supreme Court, the government takes a special She will get used to the method. That's why I stopped her from discussing everything with the government in advance."
Justice Kaul further said, "If you discuss the entire list in advance, it creates its own kind of problems."
He clarified that he was not against discussing with the government, but this discussion should not happen before the collegium meeting.
He said, "I don't think the concept of discussion is wrong. The problem is at what stage and in what manner it happens."
Justice Kaul said he felt that Chief Justice Chandrachud was upset that the collegium was not clearing the sixth name.
"I think that's what was troubling him," he said.
When asked whether he considered Justice Chandrachud a weak Chief Justice, Justice Kaul said, "The Chief Justice has two roles. One judicial and one administrative. I was not worried about his judicial role. I believe he had the intellectual capacity, the ability and the ability to work hard for it. But in terms of discussions with the government, I felt he was too lenient with it. He was very friendly with the government on administrative matters. There was a lot of discussion."
On Justice Kaul's claims, Chandrachud told The Indian Express that he had not read the book yet.
Former CGI Chandrachud said, "It is very difficult for me to comment on what Sanjay Kaul has written in his book, because I have not read that book. So until I see what he has written and in what context, I cannot respond to it in detail."
He said, "Despite this, I would like to say that as Chief Justice (CJI), my experience of collegium meetings has been very good. My relationship with Sanjay Kaul as a member of the collegium has always been very respectful. We have had meaningful conversations, logical dialogues and we have been together in a cordial atmosphere in the collegium meetings."
Former CJI Chandrachud said, “You are mentioning walkout and differences. I don't remember any such occasion when Sanjay Kaul walked away from a collegium meeting."
“Also, I had made a tradition of passing a resolution (resolution) after every collegium meeting and I do not recall any disagreement being recorded in any resolution,” he said. If you are saying that Justice Kaul has indicated that the CJI was in consultation with the government, then on this also I will have to first read exactly what he has written. But the government also has an opinion in this and it communicates with the CJI, isn't it so? Ultimately, it is the President who signs the warrant of appointment of judges."
Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh said, "The book by former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul has raised serious questions on the independence of the judiciary during the tenure of the Modi government."
"Government interference in the appointments of judges, the government's attempt to seek approval even before the collegium meeting and the government's absurd questioning of the caste of a judge from the minority community in the name of a judge - Justice Kaul has mentioned these incidents. Those things which people were hesitant to say openly, Justice Kaul has recorded in very restrained words."
“Surprisingly, the former Chief Justice of India has not denied that discussions were held with the government before appointments. When former CJI Justice Chandrachud says that the government does have a role in the negotiations and appointments with the CJI, then the question about the independence of the judiciary becomes more serious."
“Justice Kaul's statement that after the bench headed by him in the PMLA case raised the question of reconsideration of certain aspects of the court's decision, the matter was referred to another bench without discussing it with him, is extremely serious. This can give an idea of the government's daily interference in the functioning of the Supreme Court."
“If appointments of judges are subject to government approval and even benches hearing sensitive cases are changed, then for the safety of democracy it is important to ask: If this is not pressure on the judiciary and undermining its independence, then what is? The institution that protects the Constitution should be free from the pressure of power. In a democracy, independence of the judiciary is not an option, it is a necessity."
According to information available on the Supreme Court website, Kaul obtained his bachelor's degree from St. Stephen's College, Delhi University in 1979.
After this, he obtained LLB degree from Campus Law Center of Delhi University in 1982 and was registered as an advocate with Delhi Bar Council on 15 July 1982.
From 1987 to 1999, he was an advocate on record in the Supreme Court. He became a senior advocate in December 1999. On 3 May 2001, he was appointed an additional judge of the Delhi High Court and on 2 May 2003, he became a permanent judge.
