Opposition members in RS raise issues related to judiciary, including sexual harassment case

PTI, Dec 13, 2021, 7:39 PM IST

Opposition members in the Rajya Sabha on Monday raised several issues that are adversely impacting the judicial system in the country, including influencing judgments and a sexual harassment case linked to a former Supreme Court judge.

During a discussion on the High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Bill, 2021, members from the RJD, the AAP, the NCP, the TDP and the IUML supported the bill, but simultaneously raised concerns on delayed justice, infrastructure, competency of some judges etc.

Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) MP Vandana Chavan said laws are made in Parliament based on the established universal principles of human rights and natural justice.

”Look at the two examples that we see in recent times. One, a very very senior Supreme Court judge, Mr X, was accused of sexual harassment at workplace. We passed a posh law. The law says you have to appoint an Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) and the ICC will scrutinise the incident and pass the judgment. Why was he made an exception? If you want to make an exception, do make it in the law itself,” she said.

Ruling party members objected to the remarks of Chavan but she refused to budge.

The NCP leader demanded that there should be a provision to ensure the presence of 50 per cent women judges in the judiciary. She raised the issues of pending cases, increasing the retirement age of high court judges from 62 years to 65 years, the poor infrastructure in the lower courts, including stinking toilets, a foul smell in the corridors etc.

Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) Sanjay Singh raised the issues of impartial justice, pending trials, the sufferings of the poor who cannot afford lawyers’ fees and cannot furnish bail bonds etc.

He said if a sitting judge has aspirations to get a big position post retirement, then he will not be able to deliver justice.

”It should apply at least to the judges of the high courts and the Supreme Court, retire them at the age of 70 instead of 65, but do not give them any appointment on any position for five years since their retirement,” Singh said.

RJD’s Manoj Jha cited a statement of former Union minister Arun Jaitley, when he was part of the Opposition, to link the influence on judges with post-retirement appointments.

”Pre-retirement judgments are influenced by post-retirement benefits. Immediate examples of it are before us. I do not want to say. If such examples are presented, then any judgment will always remain in the doubtful category,” he said.

Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) MP Abdul Wahab supported the bill and demanded that the working days of the courts and the representation of the minority communities and other backward castes be increased in the judiciary.

He said besides the pay for judges, the salaries of the MPs should also be increased.

TDP MP Kanakamedala Ravindra Kumar raised the issue of a recent firing incident in Delhi’s Rohini court and called for enhancing the security of judges.

BJD’s Amar Patnaik said the judge-to-population ratio in India is among the lowest in the world.

”We are calculating vacancies against the sanctioned strength. The sanctioned strength is itself deficit,” he said.

BJP’s KJ Alphons demanded a division of the Supreme Court into two parts and the setting up of regional benches of the apex court.

”We need to have a Constitution bench and another bench that will only deal with appeals. We need to have regional benches of the Supreme court,” he said.

Alphons said during the COVID-19 period, the process of virtual hearing started and it must continue along with the physical working of the courts. He pitched for paying very high wages to the judges and stopping the practice of post-retirement postings.

”Many senior distinguished advocates here — Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Vivek Tankha, Navneet Krishnan, (KTS) Tulsi, Mahesh Jethmalani…. All these people are more than qualified to become judges in this country but they would not because the pay is absolutely ridiculous. Pay them,” Alphons said. He said most of the senior lawyers make more than Rs 1 crore a day on Mondays and Fridays.

Alphons called for breaking the dominance of certain people in the Supreme Court.

He said the top court is dominated by senior lawyers and every lawyer, even the new ones, should be able to stand and argue before the Chief Justice of India.