'No personal interest in Afzal's execution'

'No personal interest in Afzal's execution'

New Delhi, March 03, 2011

A day after slamming the government for inordinate delays in arriving at a decision on Parliament attack case convict Afzal Guru's mercy plea, Justice SN Dhingra on Wednesday said he did not have any personal interest in the matter. "I cannot have any personal interest in Afzal Guru's hanging nor am

I personally aggrieved. My job, as a judge, was to decide the case on the basis of evidence and give the sentence. Now, it is for the Executive to take a decision on the hanging," Justice Dhingra told HT.

On the day of his retirement as a Delhi High Court judge, Justice Dhingra, who sentenced Guru to death, had on Tuesday said: "Ministers on various platforms criticise the judiciary for pendency and talk of speedy trial…they forget the Centre is unable to take a decision on his (Afzal's) mercy petition and on many others on death row for several years."

Dhingra, who pronounced judgment in the case, within a year, said mercy petitions did not require detailed examination, as there was no need to go into the specifics.

He added that the Centre needs only to look at the basis on which courts had come to such a conclusion.

"The Centre is unable to do even this much and at the same time, keeps blaming the judiciary for pendency," he said.

The Supreme Court had, in 2006, dismissed Guru's appeal against his death sentence, after which he had filed a mercy petition.

After shooting into the limelight with the order, Justice Dhingra, who became a Delhi High Court judge five years ago, has been widely acclaimed as a judge who boldly stood up for citizens rights in the capital and speedy trial.

Justice Dhingra has also been known to uphold the freedom of the press by ruling that journalists cannot be prosecuted for carrying out sting operations to expose corruption.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/No-personal-interest-in-Afzal-s-execution/Article1-668747.aspx

Misuse of dowry provisions is legal terrorism: Delhi Court

Misuse of dowry provisions is legal terrorism: Delhi Court

Smriti Singh, TNN, Mar 3, 2011, 01.39am IST

NEW DELHI: Terming the misuse of provisions of dowry harassment by women as "legal terrorism'', a trial court has slammed such women who, in a bid to settle scores, drag all family members into a dowry harassment case though they may be "totally unconnected" with the case.

"The provisions of Section 498A are not a law to take revenge, seek recovery of dowry or to force a divorce but a penal provision to punish the wrongdoers. The victims (women) are often misguided into exaggerating the facts by adding those persons as accused who are unconnected with the harassment under a mistaken belief that by doing so they are making a strong case," additional sessions judge Kamini Lau said.

The court's remarks came while discharging a man, who was chargesheeted by police for allegedly harassing his sister-in-law for dowry. A metropolitan magistrate had summoned the man on the basis of the complaint. The man had moved the sessions court challenging the magistrate's order saying there was no legal evidence against him.

Even as the complainant alleged that the man beat her up for dowry, the court was shocked to know that he was not even present in the house at the time of the incident. In her complaint, the woman alleged that her brother-in-law on October 23, 1998, asked her to bring more money for her husband and when she showed her helplessness, she was slapped and threatened by him.

The man, however, proved his innocence by producing the certificates which stated that he was living in Mumbai at the time of the incident. After going through the record, ASJ Lau said, "in any matrimonial dispute, it is the primary duty of every court to ensure that for any fault of the husband, his other relatives including married sisters and brothers who may be living jointly or separately and the aged parents are not involved either out of vengeance or to curl out appropriate settlement."

The court also expressed its displeasure over the misuse of the dowry harassment laws. "I am compelled to observe that provision in the recent years has become consummate embodiment of gross human rights violation, extortion and corruption and even the Apex Court of our country had acknowledged this abuse and termed it as legal terrorism," it said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Misuse-of-dowry-provisions-is-legal-terrorism-Court/articleshow/7615680.cms#ixzz1FUGOhqQv

Eminent people dare SC to book them for contempt too

Eminent people dare SC to book them for contempt too

NEW DELHI: Twenty-five citizens, including eminent persons, on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court daring it to initiate contempt proceedings against them as they were expressing solidarity with advocates Prashant and Shanti Bhushan, who had alleged that eight of the 16 former Chief Justices of India (CJIs) were corrupt.

The applicants included RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal, social activist Aruna Roy, National Advisory Council (NAC) member Harsh Mander, former IIM Ahmedabad director-in-charge Prof Jagdeep S Chhokar, Magsaysay Award winner Rajendra Singh, former IFS officer and social activist Madhu Bhaduri, JNU's professor emeritus Amit Bhaduri, former West Bengal additional chief secretary Kalyani Chaudhuri and social activist Madhu Kishwar.

Others included professionals ranging from engineers, journalists, RTI activists, a major general and an educationist. Appearing for them, senior advocate Vikas Singh requested a Bench comprising Justices Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph and H L Dattu that they be made parties in the contempt proceedings drawn against Prashant Bhushan for his views about corruption in judiciary published in a weekly magazine last year. With so many eminent persons seeking to be respondents in the case, the bench refused to take up the application.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Eminent-people-dare-SC-to-book-them-for-contempt-too/articleshow/7062743.cms#ixzz17T4nY8T8

पत्नी ने किया जज को जलाने का प्रयास

पत्नी ने किया जज को जलाने का प्रयास

रायपुर। छत्तीसगढ़ के कोरबा में एक जज को उनकी पत्नी ने पेट्रोल छिड़ककर जिंदा जलाने का प्रयास किया। जज की शिकायत पर पुलिस ने आरोपी पत्नी को गिरफ्तार कर लिया। मंगलवार को मुख्य न्यायिक मजिस्ट्रेट के समक्ष आरोपी को पेश किया गया, जहां से उसे न्यायिक हिरासत में भेज दिया गया। बताया गया है कि कुछ समय से दोनों के संबंध ठीक नहीं चल रहे थे।

स्थानीय अदालत में न्यायिक दंडाधिकारी द्वितीय श्रेणी केपी सिंह भदौरिया ने पुलिस को बताया कि मंगलवार सुबह घर में उनकी पत्नी मन्नू ने उन [जज] पर पेट्रोल छिड़क दिया और माचिस लेकर उनकी ओर दौड़ीं। जज ने भागकर अपनी जान बचाई। कोरबा के पुलिस अधीक्षक रतन लाल डांगी ने बताया कि जज की शिकायत पर मुकदमा दर्ज कर मन्नू को गिरफ्तार कर लिया गया।

मन्नू ने बताया कि वह अपने पति से परेशान थी। उसने करीब आठ साल पहले अपने पति के खिलाफ दहेज प्रताड़ना का मामला दर्ज कराया था, लेकिन बाद में उनके बीच सुलह हो गई थी।

 

http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/national/crime/5_18_6996221.html

Put all new FIRs online: Delhi HC

Put all new FIRs online: Delhi HC

7th Dec 2010

NEW DELHI: In a major move towards transparency in police functioning, the high court has directed the Delhi Police to start uploading all First Information Reports (FIRs) registered in the city onto its website within 24 hours of filing. The police are required to implement the order from February 1, 2011.

The landmark order, passed by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Manmohan, said it's the duty of the police to provide information and the accused does not need to move court to get a copy of an FIR.

"Fair and impartial investigation is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution and presumption as regards the innocence of an accused is a right. Therefore, a person booked under criminal law has a right to know the nature of allegations so that he can take necessary steps to safeguard his liberty," the bench said.

Earlier, additional solicitor general A S Chandiok and amicus curie Arvind Nigam submitted their suggestions on the matter.
The counsel had said that recording of an FIR was an official act of a public official in discharge of his or her official duties and, therefore, it was a public document within the meaning of Section 74 of the Evidence Act, 1872.

The court said an accused was entitled to get a copy of the FIR earlier than what's prescribed under Section 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code (which says the FIR would be supplied through a magistrate's order after the accused moves court).

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Put-all-new-FIRs-online-Delhi-HC-/articleshow/7056292.cms#ixzz17Nmc2yYg

Justice Dhingra aquits Mother in law of dowry death, slamming the trial court and public prosecutor for callousness. 'Criminal Justice System in India Needs Overhauling'

Justice Dhingra aquits Mother in law of dowry death, slamming the trial court and  public prosecutor for callousness. 'Criminal Justice System in India Needs Overhauling'

The Delhi High Court has said the justice delivery system needs overhauling as the poor are not getting timely justice in higher courts which are are kept occupied with cases involving persons with money or power.

"The whole criminal justice system needs overhauling so that the constitutional mandate of equality before law is made meaningful and it should not be the case that higher courts are kept occupied by the persons with money or power, as is the case today," the court said.

The court made the remarks while setting aside the conviction of a poor vegetable vendor who had to spend seven years in jail due to delay in disposing his appeal in the High Court.

The trial court had awarded seven years jail term to the vendor for allegedly killing his wife in 2003 and he filed an appeal in 2004 on which the High Court took six years to pass the verdict.

In the verdict, Justice S N Dhingra found him innocent and acquitted him but he had already spent his jail term.
"In this case, the High Court did not find time to hear the appeals of other two appellants who continued to remain in jail during trial period as well as appeal period for no crime of theirs," the court said adding the High Court should fix a time limit for disposing of such appeals.

"Neither the criminal should be let off by default as the High Court has no time to hear appeals nor should the innocents rot in jail by default," the court said.

The High Court pulled up the trial court for convicting the accused even though there were not sufficient evidence against him and merely on the basis of a statement made by his brother-in-laws.

"The conviction seems to be the result of a callous criminal justice system where neither the defence counsel prepared the case nor the prosecutor discharged his duty in an impartial manner nor did the judge consider it as his duty to see what offence was made out and everyone acted in a mechanical manner," the court said.

The court found that there was no evidence that the accused was harassing his wife for dowry leading to her death."The most disturbing factor is that no evidence, whatsoever, was collected by the police about the real facts. No effort was made by the public prosecutor or by the trial judge to even go through the evidence and consider what charges were made out. Charges seemed to have been framed in a mechanical manner," the court said.

In this case, the accused had married Janki in December, 2000 and she died within five months of her marriage.The court said that in such cases husband and in-laws should come forward to tell what was the real cause of death.

"The criminal practice in India has been on the lines of old track that accused must not speak and he should not be examined as a witness. I do not know why this practice developed but in all matrimonial offences, this practice is shutting the doors of the court to the version of the other side by their advocates," the court said.

http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?703620

Plea to recall ruling where woman was described as ‘keep' - look who's talking of Gender Neutrality

Plea to recall ruling where woman was described as ‘keep' - look  who's talking of Gender Neutrality

Contending that the use of the expression ‘keep' in a recent judgment to describe a woman was highly derogatory and a discrimination against women on grounds of marital status, Mahila Dakshta Samiti, a women's organisation has moved the Supreme Court for its recall.

On October 21, a Bench of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Misra in a judgment had said, “not all live-in relationship will amount to a relationship in the nature of marriage to get the benefit of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005. If a man has a “keep,” whom he maintains financially and uses mainly for sexual purpose and/or as a servant it would not, in our opinion, be a “relationship in the nature of marriage. Merely spending weekends together or a one-night stand would not make it a ‘domestic relationship.”

Offended by the expressions used, the very next day, Additional Solicitor-General Indira Jaising voiced her protest before Justice Katju, who wrote the judgment, and indicated that women's organisations would be filing review petitions for recall of the ruling.

In its review petition, Mahila Dakshta Samiti said, “the expression such as ‘keep' which specifically refer to woman is based on social and cultural prejudices which need to be eliminated in order to prevent discrimination against woman. The expression would perpetuate social and cultural prejudices and is based on the idea of stereotyping woman.

It submitted that “Article 2(f) of the Convention for Elimination of Discrimination against Women calls for change in the traditional roles of men and women in bringing about gender equity. Article 2(F) provides that States should take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices, which constitute discrimination against women.”

It said, “in law only chattel can be “kept” and not human beings. Slaves could be “kept” as they are considered chattels in law and owned by the master. Hence the word ‘keep' is inappropriate in a constitutional regime such as ours which guarantees fundamental rights and the dignity of woman. The use of the expression ‘keep' violates Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India as it is not gender neutral and applies only to women. Further the expression ‘servants' is derogatory of the dignity of labour and they are now known as domestic help.”

The petitioner said, “while deciding the nature of the relationship, which meets the requirement of a relationship in the nature of marriage, the Supreme Court has also laid down certain relationship which do not qualify for being described as relationship in the nature of marriage.

It said the court had recorded its findings based on Wikipedia, which is an online encyclopaedia and information can be entered therein by any person and as such it may not be authentic and cannot be used for the purpose of determining the content of relationship. It was of the view that the Supreme Court was not called upon to give such observations in the facts and circumstances of the case as emerging from the judgment. The petitioner while seeking to recall the order in so far as the use of these expressions was concerned sought an oral hearing.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article918011.ece

Honesty can’t be faked

Honesty can’t be faked

November 29, 2010   3:18:27 AM

Joginder Singh

The Government has grievously erred in the appointment of PJ Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner. It must make amends without delay

The Supreme Court of India, while hearing two separate though connected cases of public interest litigation, has raised a pertinent question by asking as to how the newly-appointed Central Vigilance Commissioner could fulfill his responsibilities since he is still an accused in a criminal case relating to irregularities in the import of palm oil. The Supreme Court has pointed out that the Central Vigilance Commissioner is supposed to order investigations into complaints of corruption received by the Commission he heads, the appellate anti-corruption body which supervises the functioning of the Central Bureau of Investigation. The accused in such complaints could well say: “You cannot deal with these as you are an accused in a criminal case yourself.”

According to the two PILs, the Union Government had ignored the Supreme Court’s guidelines for the appointment of the CVC. Under these guidelines, a three-member committee is supposed to select the CVC from a panel of civil servants with impeccable integrity and outstanding career records. The Supreme Court wanted to know whether this criterion had been followed. It also asked the Government whether the charge sheet against Mr PJ Thomas had been consistently ignored over the last 10 years during which time he was promoted several times — from being Food Secretary in Kerala he became Telecom Secretary and Secretary in the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs before being appointed CVC. The Supreme Court said, “We are not against the person but we are on his office... We want to know if he, being an accused, is able to function at this sensitive post.” The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau of Kerala had filed the charge sheet in the palm oil import scam as per Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act after securing proper sanction.

The Attorney-General later commented that if the criterion of ‘impeccable integrity’ were to be strictly applied then even the appointments of several judges and others holding constitutional office would be “subject to scrutiny and challenged”. The Attorney-General, perhaps, may not be aware that for every worthwhile appointment, including that of the judges, a vigilance clearance is required. The appointment of Chief Vigilance Officers of Government departments and public sector undertakings is cleared by the CVC after obtaining necessary reports from the CBI and other agencies. In fact, the Chief Justice of India rammed home the point by saying that under service rules, someone with a charge sheet pending against him would not even be considered for a promotion.

There is more than what meets the eye in all high profile appointments by the Government irrespective of the party in power. Rulers who abide by ethics do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly; those who are unscrupulous constantly seek a way around laws. The top bureaucrats — the Cabinet Secretary, the Home Secretary and the Principal Secretary — are all from Kerala. A phone call or an e-mail from any of them would have fetched them the latest information about the status of the case against Mr Thomas. The officer cannot be faulted for the munificence of the Government, but his colleagues who suppressed facts must share the blame. Fellow bureaucrats have got him a post-retirement job, that too with the status of a Supreme Court judge, that will keep him in comfort at taxpayers’ expense for another five years.

Indeed, the Union and the State Governments run an employment exchange for retired officers who have not only toed the line laid down by their political bosses but also, when asked to bend, have chosen to crawl. There are more than 400 committees and commissions which are practically reserved for retired officers. This is strange as most of the working officers in senior positions do not have even half-an-hour of work. Sometime back I ran into a Secretary to the Government and asked him was work. He said since he did not toe the line of his Minister the post of OSD was created for him. He defined OSD not as Officer on Special Duty but Officer in Search of Duty.

The only condition of post-retirement employment is that the bureaucrat should not only be flexible but also pliable. It is said in jest that civil servants lose a vertebra of their backbone for every one or two years of their service. By the time they retire, barring honourable exceptions, most of them become spineless wonders. They do so in the interest of their survival and occupying good posts till they kick the bucket. Nobody doubts the integrity of the Prime Minister, but he seems to have an incredible amount of faith in a corrupt bureaucracy which does not place all the facts before him. Why should the Government try to justify the unjustifiable? It has blundered in the appointment of the CVC.

Good governance requires hard work and the courage to take decisions. You do not need Solomon’s wisdom to realize that our actions produce reactions. When the Government has fixed the retirement age for bureaucrats at 60, why should some be favoured with extensions in service for five years by being appointed to various commissions or constitutional posts? The Government swears by the rule of law and fairplay but more often than not it treats some as more equal than others.

Thanks to the Supreme Court, the law of the land still remains alive and is periodically upheld as above all, no matter how powerful the individuals or institutions concerned may be. The Government must realize that there is no room for legal hair splitting on the pertinent questions raised by the Supreme Court in the case pertaining to the appointment of the CVC in violation of all norms and guidelines. There really should be no need to remind the Prime Minister, whose integrity is unimpeachable and who has a high sense of probity that governance is largely about being honest and speaking the truth, no matter how bitter it may be. Given the fact that the Prime Minister is widely seen as an honest individual, he should take the initiative in rectifying the blunder made by his Government in the appointment of Mr Thomas as the CVC. He is clearly not the right choice for the job; he should be removed and due diligence must be applied in finding an officer to replace him. There is no shortage of those who fit the bill and have an unblemished record. What Carlyle said for individuals is equally applicable to the Government: Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure there is one less rascal in the world.

http://www.dailypioneer.com/299756/Honesty-can%E2%80%99t-be-faked.html

Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

TNN, Nov 26, 2010, 03.32am IST

AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat HC on Thursday slapped a penalty of Rs 1 lakh on Dashrath Devda, president of Akhil Bharatiya Patni Atyachar Virodhi Sangh for protesting against alleged misuse of domestic violence laws. A division bench fined him for filing frivolous PIL and for wasting court's time.

Devda had approached the HC by way of filing a PIL demanding judicial interference in the alleged misuse of protection laws for women. He was demanding a protection in legislation for men, who are according to him henpecked by their wives.

Devda has been claiming that women have abused the laws, which are in favour of them, but certain protection for men is also required against the misuse of the legislation. He filed this PIL, which came up for hearing before a division bench. When Devda began arguments as party-in-person, the court asked him to withdraw his PIL because his demand was to amend the legislation. Refusing to pay any attention to what the court was hinting at, Devda continued to argue how women in this country are worshipped, and no law is required for their protection. However, the chief justice repeatedly asked him to withdraw the PIL.

Ultimately, the court imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on Devda and asked him to pay the money to the Self Employed Women's Association — an NGO working for women empowerment. The court has directed Devda to pay the amount of penalty within two months.

Devda and members of his association often stage demonstrations and take out rallies in the city in protest against the domestic violence laws. They also help men in court proceedings, who face charges of domestic violence from their spouses. In this PIL also, Devda tried to assert their views that different pieces of legislation favouring women are misused, and ultimate sufferers are the family members. The association has been protesting against anti-dowry law of Section 498A of IPC, alimony related provisions in Section 125 of CrPC and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/Man-fighting-for-harassed-husbands-fined-1L-by-HC/articleshow/6991947.cms#ixzz16KwY9gFj

Re-look at the dealings of Domestic Violence Act and Section 498a of the IPC-women's movement should focus more on protecting families than fighting against men

Re-look at the dealings of Domestic Violence Act and Section 498a of the IPC-women's movement should focus more on protecting families than fighting against men 

MYSORE: The Ashodaya Samithi, an organization helping sex workers and University of Mysore highlighted various forms of violence, harassment and exploitation faced by women in society, on Thursday. The event was held to observe international day for elimination of violence against women. It emphasized on the fact that decline in human values has led to various problems faced by women in society.

Southern police range departmental enquiry cell DySP Dharanidevi Malagatti said where there are no human values there will be more exploitation and harassment. Violence against women is always a violation of human rights and is still prevalent in society.

Demanding salary from women, restricting women's freedom, forcing women to go for work, etc., all amounts to crime under Domestic Violation Act. The fairer sex is still tolerating various kinds of harassment in their places of work and at home, said Dharanidevi and sought an end to violence against women.

Sociology department chairman Gururaj B felt the need to accelerate efforts to educate people, particularly those from the lower and middle classes, as they are usually the silent victims of harassment and exploitation.

Expressing concern over the misuse of laws, the chairman claimed that 75% of cases filed against men for harassment is false. Quoting a report of mid-1990s, he stated that over 1.25 lakh women had committed suicide over harassment in India, whereas the number of men who ended lives over similar charges had crossed 1.5 lakh. "We need to take a re-look at the dealings of Domestic Violence Act and Section 498a of the IPC. Also the women's movement should focus more on protecting families than fighting against men," he stated.


 Decline in values has led to violence against women - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mysore/Decline-in-values-has-led-to-violence-against-women/articleshow/6990667.cms#ixzz16K5oXxNM

Judicial accountability Bill, cure worse than disease and Without transparency, there could be no accountability: Justice Shah

Judicial accountability Bill, cure worse than disease: Justice Shah

November 14, 2010

Without transparency, there could be no accountability

Highlighting serious lacunae in the proposed Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010, the former Chief Justice of the Delhi and Madras High Courts Justice of Delhi and Madras High Courts Ajit Prakash Shah on Saturday cautioned that the measure was an example of cure being worse than the disease.

“There is a complete misalignment and a mismatch between the present system of judicial appointments and core values of judicial accountability.”

He was delivering the keynote address after inaugurating a two-day seminar on “Strengthening Democracy: Role of Judiciary” organised here by the International Centre Goa (ICG) in association with the Media Information and Communication Centre of India, the Friedrich Ebert foundation-India and the Goa High Court Bar Association.

Emphasising the need for accountability, Justice Shah said that without transparency, there could be no accountability; secrecy was only the preserve of a dictatorship.

Analysing judicial accountability and its nuances, Justice Shah said there must be a balance between the competing principles of judicial independence, on the one hand, and accountability and transparency, on the other.

Straightjacket definition

His primary objection is that the Bill seeks to provide a straightjacket definition of “misbehaviour” under Section 2(j), which tends to lose its elasticity and become both under-inclusive and over-inclusive. A minor, inadvertent breach of judicial standards could constitute misconduct, and in so far as the definition is exhaustive, it is incapable of catching within its fold any “misbehaviour” that might not be covered by this provision.

Secondly, he said, the Bill tended to render the Oversight Committee just a post office referring each complaint to the Scrutiny Panel. This was likely to lead to multiplicity of complaints against judges and also a colossal waste of time.

Justice Shah's major objection is to the composition of the Scrutiny Panel which consists of three members, two of whom would be judges sitting in the same court as the judge against whom a complaint has been made. It would be difficult for judges to dispassionately decide a case against one of their own colleagues and sitting with them day in, day out.

Also, the composition and tenure of the Investigation Committee was undefined. Theoretically, therefore, it was possible for a layperson without any knowledge, experience and standing to be part of an inquiry panel against a sitting judge of a superior court.

Justice Shah said the Bill would create an atmosphere of total secrecy, more regressive than the present system, and there did not appear to be any rational reason for the change.

The idea of “minor” punishment was unworkable and it had the potential to seriously undermine judicial status.

Only binary system will work

A situation where sitting judges were publicly censured but they were still sitting on the Bench and deciding cases would damage the credibility of the entire system.

“This is an area where only a binary system of punishment can work. Either the judge is guilty and must be impeached, or he is not, and no action must be taken against him,” Justice Shah said, observing that the challenge was to develop mechanisms of accountability that did not undermine judicial independence.

Later speaking on ‘Accountability vs. Independence of Judiciary', Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan described the Bill as a “cosmetic exercise designed to fool the people into believing that some kind of exercise was conducted by the government to clean up corruption in the judiciary.” The outcome of it would be absolutely “zero.”

“If the government was serious on judicial accountability, then why is it not opening out consultations with public,” asked Mr. Bhushan and dubbed any exercise of consultations with judges “bogus” because judges had a vested interest in the Bill.

Goa Speaker Pratapsingh Rane and ICG Director Nandini Sahai were present.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article884475.ece

Family courts falling short of goals

Family courts falling short of goals

By: Imran Shah | Published: October 14, 2010

LAHORE - The unexpected alarming surge in the institution of cases for divorce on the basis of Khula has made it difficult for the family courts to follow the National Judicial Policy-Making Committee (NJMPC), a body supposed to chalk out various long and short-term measures for early disposal of the cases.
The filing of divorce suits has witnessed an unprecedented surge over the last few years due to various factors like ever-rising unemployment and price-hike and monetary issues, in addition to the bad impact of entertainment channels, especially of Indian ones, revealed a survey conducted by TheNation.
The process of getting minors custody is a separate issue but all that including the recovery of dowry-articles and custody of minors can be claimed through a single suit, which has a relief to the women.
Advocate Muhammad Akbar Khan and others pointed out that family courts were overburdened with swelling pile of divorce suits. “The courts are falling short of the goals, set by the National Judicial Policy according to which family cases including that of the custody of minors and recovery of dowry-articles should be decided within six months,” they elaborated.
A data collected from the courts showed horrible figures of suits, instituted for getting divorces. In the family court of Civil Judge Syed Naseer Abbas Naqvi, a total 1,116 cases for dissolution of marriage were instituted from January to August 2010, and 1,046 cases of separations were decided by the court during the said period. Similarly the family court of Civil Judge Tamsal Syed Naeem received 724 cases for the dissolution of marriage from January to July 2010. Some 141 cases of family matters were instituted in the court of Civil Judge Ayeshum Bint-e-Sadiq in the month of July 2010. Again 90 per cent of the cases were of the separations.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Regional/Lahore/14-Oct-2010/Family-courts-falling-short-of-goals

11 HC judges transferred ‘in public interest’

The government on Wednesday transferred 11 judges of six high courts who were recommended for relocation "in public interest" by the Supreme Court collegium.  HT was the first to report about the initiative of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), Justice S.H. Kapadia to shift judges, the biggest single shake-up since 1993.   

According to a Law Ministry notification, two judges each from Delhi, Allahabad and Andhra Pradesh High Courts have been transferred while three have been moved out of the Punjab & Haryana High Court and one judge each has been shifted out of the Madras and Orissa High Courts.

Justices V.M. Sahai and Poonam Srivastava of the Allahabad High Court have been transferred to the Gujarat and Jharkhand High Courts respectively.

Justices T. Meena Kumari and D.S.R. Verma of the Andhra Pradesh HC have been transferred to the Patna and Allahabad High Courts respectively.

Three judges from the Punjab and Haryana High Court — Justices Ashutosh Mahunta, Vinod Kumar Sharma and H.S. Bhalla — have been transferred to the Allahabad, Madras and Orissa High Courts respectively.

Justices S.N. Agarwal and Aruna Suresh from the Delhi High Court have been sent to the Madhya Pradesh and the Orissa High Courts.

Justice M.Jeyapaul of the Madras High Court and Justice B.P. Ray of the Orissa High Courts have been sent to the Punjab & Haryana and the Karnataka High Courts.

The collegium also recommended the transfer of Justice R.S. Mohite of the Bombay High Court to the Patna High Court, but he resigned last month.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/11-HC-judges-transferred-in-public-interest/Article1-612562.aspx

Is the judiciary going soft on murderers and rapists

 

Judges are actually given too much discretion

The judgment given in any case depends on the proceedings of the court and the judge's discretion. The standards adopted in a particular case may differ in the high court and Supreme Court. There are certain guidelines for a death sentence and it must be a 'rarest of the rare' case. Thus, there is no question of whether a judgement is 'right' or 'wrong' . It all depends on how the bench of judges perceive the case based on the submitted proof. The outlook of judges of a bench may also differ. There is no standardisation in the verdict to be pronounced. However, I would like to point out that judges are given too much discretion. In the end, judges base their verdict on the proof put forth after investigations.
-PB Sawant, former judge, Supreme Court of India

Leniency on the part of the Supreme Court is not justified

In our country, a death sentence is pronounced only in the 'rarest of rare' cases. The court makes its decision on the basis of evidence and the investigation carried out, but the punishment should be awarded in such a way that justice actually prevails. The reason that the judges gave for reducing the death sentence of the convict in the Priyadarshini Mattoo case are dubious. There is no justification for such a dreadful crime. It is different in a case where the victim is alive and the accused offers to marry the victim.
While upholding that he was guilty of the crime, the judges cited mitigating circumstances, which included the young age of the accused at the time of the murder and his having married and become a father. These factors cannot reduce the gravity of a crime that was premeditated and executed in the most brutal manner.
This kind of leniency on the part of the Supreme Court is not justified. The verdict in such a case should act as a deterrent to others as well. Leniency would make people feel that anyone can get away with such a gruesome offence. Rape and murder of a victim is a very serious crime. The commutation of the verdict is not justified.
-Kiran Moghe, president, Janwadi Mahila Sanghatana

Has justice been served?

Priyadarshini Mattoo case

A former IPS officer's son, Santosh Kumar Singh, who was convicted of brutally raping and murdering 25-year-old Priyadarshini Mattoo 14 years ago, escaped the death sentence when the Supreme Court set aside the Delhi high court's order and gave him a life term.
The SC said the "horrendous crime" had happened because Santosh's parents were over-indulgent. The judges said many ghastly crimes happen when "an accused belongs to a category with unlimited power or pelf or even more dangerously, a volatile cocktail of the two".
The apex court added that Singh was young at the time of the incident, and after his acquittal by the trial court he got married and became a father, and there was nothing to suggest that he was not capable of reforming.

Pratibha Srikantamurthy

A fast track sessions court convicted cab driver Shiva Kumar to rigorous imprisonment for life for kidnapping, raping and murdering BPO employee Pratibha Srikantamurthy in December 2005.
Pratibha, who joined HP Globalsoft in 2005 after her marriage, went missing on December 13, 2005 after leaving home for her night shift. Her body was found on the outskirts of Bangalore a day later.
The 113-page judgement said, "There was no dominating control over the deceased. She was not a helpless woman," adding the crime was not enormous in nature and not in the "rarest of rare" bracket. The judge said Kumar, who was 22 then, is now 27. He was not a habitual offender and the prosecution had not shown that he had been convicted for crime earlier, he said.

Without harsh punishment, people will not fear the law
In rape-murder cases, the law is not as harsh as it should be. Thus, there is no fear in society when it comes to committing these crimes. Take any rape or criminal case; the time it takes to reach a verdict is very long. When the fast track courts take that much time (five years in Pratibha's case), why do we need them at all? In this way, people will lose faith in fast track courts. They will be dissatisfied with our judicial system if there is no change in the procedures, especially in cases involving atrocities against women. Such soft judgements will obviously have consequences, wherein people will not be afraid of committing crimes against women. Moreover, by commuting a death sentence, you give the accused time to find ways to get free.
Capital punishment is criticised vehemently on moral grounds, so we do not have an option but to replace it. However, if it is stopped, bad elements in society will continue committing such crimes.
-Lata Bhise, advisor, Yashada

The judgement cannot be made on the basis of public opinion
Life imprisonment until death is as bad or may be worse than a death sentence. Capital punishment is not required as long as the guilty is being punished for his crime. In fact, a life term is more severe as the convict has to live with his guilt in isolation.
People expected a death sentence in the Priyadarshini case, but the judgement cannot be based on public opinion. Mob mentality tends to be brutal, so the judiciary should not get influenced by what people think. Every murder is heinous, but the 'rarest of rare' case can be applied only to the most gruesome crimes.
-Ritu Lamba, law student

Such acts go against the norms of humanity and compassion
The Priyadarshini Mattoo case has revived the debate over whether capital punishment should be awarded and if it can deter others from committing such crimes. Our Constitution and statutes recognise capital punishment as a deterrent to heinous crimes. In case of a crime as gruesome and merciless as rape and murder, the convict should certainly be granted a death penalty. Such acts go against the norms of humanity and compassion. Anything less than life imprisonment until death should not be acceptable.
As far as the Supreme Court verdict in this case is concerned, the death sentence should not have been reduced to life imprisonment. Keeping in view the heinousness of the crime, the court should have upheld the previous decision and stood by it.
-Sameer Nargolkar, lawyer

Severity of punishment is not a deterrent to crime
Death penalty must be abolished in India because it is a cruel way of punishing someone. It is surprising that the lower courts are enthusiastic in awarding death sentences. A capital punishment with the noose does not go well in a civilised society. If we call ourselves civilised, we must stop this practice. The severity of punishment does not act as a deterrent to crime. The surety and speedy delivery of punishment is more important. People generally feel that life imprisonment is a soft way of punishing someone. Considering the severity of the crime, courts can prolong the period of imprisonment. In case of Priyadarshini, the accused got a life term till death, which is a severe punishment.
-Ramesh Awasthi, founder, MASUM

Flaws in investigation and filing of cases affect judgement
There are two issues in the trial of rape cases — the time required by the court and the quantum of punishment. Both these clauses must be revisited and given a rethink. Two judges can differ in their judgement because the circumstantial evidence may vary. That is how they may arrive at different conclusions. A judge has to decide on the basis of the evidence placed in front of him. If the investigation done by the police is shabby, it can affect the judgment.
I agree that the way rape-murder cases are handled needs to be debated, but it is wrong to criticise the judges and their judgement. Many issues have to be considered in every case. Moreover, if the judgement is based on the investigation, collection of evidence and the way the case is filed, the judge can only do so much. I would say that investigation agencies are the real culprits. One must be persistent in pointing out the flaws in the investigation process and filing of cases.
-Aroona Nafday, advocate

There is a rise in false rape cases, so a court has to be cautious
One cannot say the law has been soft in both cases. The judges have given their verdict based on circumstantial evidence and the investigation reports. The investigation into a case and collection of evidence are the reason for delayed judgements. A court cannot pronounce a verdict without proper facts and data. Cases get prolonged till judges receive the essential proof.

In a recent report, the Pune police said that 74% of rape cases in 2008-2009 were found to be instances of consensual sex. Moreover, there have been cases in which the accused has been falsely implicated. For example, in the case of the American student of Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in Mumbai last year, the medical report did not confirm rape and the DNA report was negative. The complainant told the doctor she was raped by three men whose names she did not know. However, in the FIR, she accused six men and named them. Then, she claimed that she may have been raped, but that she had fallen unconscious after 1 in the night. On the other hand, phone records show that she was texting and calling all night. Thus, in such a case, circumstances become confusing and the judicial process cannot be hurried. Due to the high number of false rape cases and women-centric laws, the court has to ensure that a person is not falsely implicated.

I am not denying that rapes do not happen and the real culprit has to be punished, however, the case has to follow the required process of investigation before a judgement is given.
-Atit Rajpora, activist, Save Indian Family Foundation

team speak up Rajesh Rao, Disha Kohli & Mallika Rale
GET IN TOUCH: Please email us your views at punespeakup@dnaindia.net,
or call on 020- 39888888 extn 125.

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/epapermain.aspx?queryed=40&querypage=4&eddate=10/13/2010&view=nw

Apex court cautions high courts on use of powers

Apex court cautions high courts on use of powers

Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:24:14 PM by IANS

New Delhi, Oct 12 (IANS) The Supreme Court has said that though high courts enjoy vast powers for administration of criminal justice (under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure) but the same was not unbridled and should be exercised cautiously and sparingly.

“It needs little emphasis that although the jurisdiction of the high court under the said provision (Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) is very wide but it is not unbridled,” said an apex court bench of Justice D.K. Jain and Justice H.L. Dattu in a judgment Oct 8.

The provision confers extra ordinary powers on high courts in relation to the administration of criminal justice.

Under the provision, the high court in order to meet the ends of justice can pass any order even in situations where there is no statutory backing for such an order in the Cr.P.C.

The court sounded its caution while setting aside the Bombay High Court order of Oct 9, 2007, by which it had declined to quash criminal complaint against the then chairman of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB) by a company, Switchgear Limited. Asoke Basak was heading the board when the complaint was filed.

The company entered into various contracts for the installation of low tension load management system for the MSEB and deposited Rs.five lakh as security.

In the course of the time, some dispute arose between the two and the company withdrew from its deal with the MSEB.

It sought the refund of its security which was declined on the grounds that the same has been adjusted against the dues payable by the company. Against this a criminal complaint was a filed before a magistrate which the Bombay High Court declined to quash.

Pronouncing the judgment, Justice Jain said: “The high court is required to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the code sparingly, carefully and cautiously, ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice to prevent the abuse of the process of court.”

“One of the situations when the high court would be justified in invoking its powers is where the allegations in the first information report or the complaint, as the case may be, taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged,” the judgment said.

Referring to an earlier verdict of the apex court, the judgment said that the exercise of the said powers was a “serious matter” for the accused, thus, the high court should not superficially examine the matter under its consideration.

The high court should exercise the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the apex court, the judgment recorded.

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/apex-court-cautions-high-courts-on-use-of-powers_100443396.html

Nothing moves without money, Legalise corruption - SC

Nothing moves without money, Legalise corruption - SC

The Supreme Court has expressed concern over growing corruption in the government machinery, particularly in the income tax, sales tax and excise departments, saying “ nothing moves without money”. “It is very unfortunate that there is no control over corruption in the country. There is rampant

corruption, particularly in the department of income tax, sales tax and excise department. Nothing moves without money,” a Bench of Justices Markandeya Katju and T.S. Thakur said.

The apex court was admitting an appeal filed by the CBI challenging the acquittal of an income tax inspector, Mohanlal Sharma, by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Additional Solicitor General P.P. Malhotra, appearing for the CBI, submitted that Sharma was acquitted by the high court despite the trial court holding him guilty of demanding and accepting a bribe of R10,000 from an IT assessee. He was earlier sentenced to one year’s rigorous imprisonment by the trial court.

The bench said “why doesn’t the government legalise corruption so that a specific amount is fixed for every case... That way, every individual will know how much bribe he has to pay.”

It added sarcastically, “Poor government officials, we can’t blame them also because of the growing inflation.”

Sharma, who appeared in person, denied the allegation and said he was falsely implicated.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Nothing-moves-without-money-SC/H1-Article1-610994.aspx

Court pulls up Delhi sub-divisional magistrate

Court pulls up Delhi sub-divisional magistrate

New Delhi, Oct 4 (IANS) A sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) posted in south Delhi has been pulled up by the Delhi High Court for abusing his power and acting in a corrupt manner in a land dispute case.

Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra while setting aside a December 2009 order passed by Vivek Tripathy, SDM, Vasant Vihar, said: “It is most unfortunate that an SDM holding a responsible post in executive could have acted in such a corrupt manner that he could pass an order without caring for the orders passed by his predecessor in respect of the same land.”

The matter is related to a dispute over 14 biswas of land (1 biswa is 8.2 acres) in Bijwasan Village in south Delhi.

Earlier, the SDM’s senior had passed an order in favour of Sanjeev Kumar Sharma who was declared owner of the land. But Tripathy modified the ruling when his senior’s decision was contested by Usha Puri in Bijwasan village.

“The parties were all along contesting rights over the land in various courts. However, the SDM, in patent abuse of his power, conducted the proceedings on Dec 17, 2009, late at night, in the absence of the petitioner,” the court said in an order delivered last week.

“When the petitioner learnt about the late night proceedings, he went to the SDM but he was not allowed to participate in the proceedings and in gross misuse of his power passed the order,” said Justice Dhingra.

Following a legal battle for several years, the 14 biswas land was allotted to Sharma and physical possession was given to him with the help of local police in 2001. Puri contested the order in various forums but the decisions went against them.

In December 2009, on an application filed by Puri, the SDM passed an ex-parte order in a hurry favouring her, without issuing even a notice to Sharma. Later, he declined Sharma’s plea for re-hearing of the matter

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/court-pulls-up-delhi-sub-divisional-magistrate_100439188.html

Activist judges can thwart corrupt cops,“Judges cannot remain oblivious to injustice” – Justice Dhingra - Delhi Police rarely act against its erring officials

“Judges cannot remain oblivious to injustice” – Justice Dhingra

06.10.2010 | 21:46
New Delhi
Abhijit Pandey

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a Delhi Police officer against a lower court decision directing to initiate criminal proceedings against the officer for not registering a case on the complaint of a woman who had been gang raped in 2005.

The court while upholding the lower court decision said “The Sessions Judge was rightly disturbed at the lack of sensitivity of the petitioner to a gang rape victim and his grave dereliction of duty in not registering FIR in a gang rape case”.

The court dismissed the contention of the petitioner that the power to direct police to make further inquiry under section 156 Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) rest with the Magistrate and not with the Session Judge. Justice Dhingra noted with regret, “The learned Sessions Judge in this case directed registration of an FIR and had also brought the relevant facts to the notice of the senior police officials. It was expected of the police department to have taken action immediately and swiftly in this case. The most unfortunate part is that whatsoever wrong the police officials may do, the department rarely takes action against them instead they are protected despite dereliction of duties on their part.” Justice Shivnarayan Dhingra pulled up the police department for not taking appropriate action against such officers.

“I also consider that a judicial officer apart from being a Judge is also a human being and citizen of this country. He while discharging his functions as a Judge cannot remain aloof and oblivious to his functions as a citizen of this country and cannot just adjudicate the matter and rest with it when he finds that a police officer involved in the investigation of the case had deliberately tried to save the accused persons. It is his constitutional duty to bring it to the notice of the department and ask for appropriate action including registration of an FIR.” the court observed and dismissed the petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated on behest of recommendation of the Sessions Judge.

http://www.lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=2469

also @

Activist judges can thwart corrupt cops: HC

New Delhi, October 06, 2010

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday said that the menace of cops colluding with accused in many criminal cases and in lodging of FIRs, can be effectively thwarted if a judge goes beyond the evidences submitted before him and thinks like a lay person. The court said that it is the judge’s

“constitutional duty” to bring it to the notice of the department and ask for appropriate action including FIR registration.

Justice SN Dhingra ruled: “If a Judge learns about commission of a crime, either inside the court or he learns about commission of crime by the investigating officer/SHO, during the course of trial, there is no reason why he cannot inform about this crime having been committed by one of the police officers, to his superiors and ask that action should be taken in accordance with law.”

“The HC considers that a judicial officer apart from being a Judge is also a human being and citizen of this country. While discharging functions, a Judge cannot remain aloof and oblivious to his functions as a citizen. He cannot just adjudicate the matter and rest with it when he finds that a police officer involved in the investigation of the case had deliberately tried to save the accused persons,” Dhingra said.

According to the High Court, “An FIR can be registered at the instance of any person, who has the information of commission of crime.”

Justice Dhingra’s remarks came while dismissing a petition filed by Inspector Gurmeet Singh seeking quashing of criminal proceedings ordered against him by the trial judge for refusing to lodge FIR in a Gokulpuri gang rape case in 2005. Singh was the SHO of the police station at the time of the incident.

The sessions judge’s order against the cop came after he tried and convicted all the accused in the gang rape case.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Activist-judges-can-thwart-corrupt-cops-HC/Article1-608915.aspx

----

also @

Delhi Police rarely act against its erring officials: HC

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/delhi-police-rarely-act-against-its-erring-officials-hc/384300.html

SC judge advocates transparency in the working of judges and unbiased approach

SC judge advocates transparency in the working of judges and unbiased approach

Punjab Newsline Network

 

Sunday, 26 September 2010

CHANDIGARH: Justice Dalveer Bhandari Judge, Supreme Court of India Sunday stressed the need to enhance quality of adjudication besides stepping up the efforts to monitor the same at the highest level. 

He was speaking at the valedictory function of the three-day Regional Judicial conference organized by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in collaboration with Chandigarh Judicial Academy and National Judicial Academy on Enhancing Quality of Adjudication at Chandigarh Judicial Academy. Justice Bhandari said that the hallmark of quality of adjudication was transparency in the working of the judges and their unbiased approach. The judgments should be consistent, correct and there should be commitment on the part of the judiciary to uphold the values enshrined in our Constitution. Valedictory sessions was presided over by Justice Mukul Mudgal, Chief Justice, Punjab & Haryana High Court and Justice S.B. Sinha, former Judge, Supreme Court of India was the guest of honour. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, Judge, Punjab & Haryana High Court concluded the conference with vote of thanks.

The Conference was inaugurated by Justice Mukul Mudgal Chief Justice Punjab and Haryana High Court on September 24. Addressing the judicial officers Justice Mudgal said that quality of justice was inseparable from the expectations of the society.  In ultimate analysis, his Lordship emphasized a balancing of various factors involved in the dispensation of justice with a view to achieve what our society requires so that we could live up to the expectations of the people and make the justice delivery system really efficacious. Delivering the key note address, Justice T.S. Thakur, Judge Hon’ble Supreme Court of India said that so far no one has challenged our judicial system which was based on sound principles but there was a need to increase the Judge-population ratio and if our Judicial Officers were given to deal with lesser number of cases then certainly the quality of adjudication would not be in any manner lesser than the other advanced Countries. The reference was also made regarding the disposal in a phased manner by the Courts working under Punjab & Haryana High Court, during the tenure of Justice T.S. Thakur as the Chief Justice of Punjab & Haryana High Court and the results regarding disposal were appreciable.

Professor G. Mohan Gopal, Director, National Judicial Academy, Bhopal, pointed out that there is need to measure and monitor quality of adjudication. We must set some parameters or standards for the same. He further pointed out that Right Protection Index can be one of the indicators for measuring and monitoring quality of adjudication. He further stated about six points for dispensing quality justice. Professor Virender Kumar, Director, Academic CJA, in his address said that overall public trust and confidence is the dominant condition of good governance, transparency and accountability and is vital to the interest of the society.  The Court should strive to achieve such levels of efficient working as to create the necessary trust and confidence in the people.

Justice Deepak Mishra, Chief Justice Delhi High Court, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Judge, Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge, H.P. High Court Justice Sunil Hali, Judge, J & K High Court, Justice Dharamveer, Judge, Uttrakhand High Court, Justice Ranjit Singh, Judge, Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice J. P. Singh, Judge, J& K High Court , Justice Shantanagoudar, Judge Karnataka High Court, Justice Sanjib Banerjee, Judge, Calcutta High Court, Justice Sunil Ambwani, Judge, Allahabad High Court, Justice Badar Durrej Ahmed, Judge, Delhi High Court, Justice K. Kannan, Judge, Punjab and Haryana High Court also expressed their views during the three-day judicial conference.

http://www.punjabnewsline.com/content/sc-judge-advocates-transparency-working-judges-and-unbiased-approach/24303

'Hire upright, honest judges to change corrupt judiciary image' - SC

'Hire upright, honest judges to change corrupt judiciary image' – SC

23 sep 2010

NEW DELHI: Concerned at the dipping image of the judicial system due to growing incidents of corruption, the Supreme Court has said all round efforts were needed urgently to recruit upright and honest persons as judicial officers to effect an image makeover for the judiciary.

"Upright and honest judicial officers are needed not only to bolster the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the litigants but also to sustain the culture of integrity, virtue and ethics among judges," said a bench comprising Justices Mukundakam Sharma and Anil R Dave.

Writing for the bench, Justice Sharma said: "Public perception of judiciary matters just as much as its role in dispute resolution. The credibility of the entire judiciary is often undermined by isolated acts of transgression by a few members of the bench, and therefore it is imperative to maintain a high benchmark of honesty, accountability and good conduct."

The bench gave vent to its feeling while upholding the dismissal of a Jammu & Kashmir district judge. It said the officer was in the probation period and that the high court was right in not confirming his services after scrutinising his track record. Not taking this incident as an isolated one, the bench reflected upon the solemn duty cast on the HCs to consider and appreciate the service of a judicial officer before confirming him in service so as to weed out the deadwood and corrupt from the judiciary.

 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Hire-upright-honest-judges-to-change-corrupt-judiciary-image/articleshow/6610252.cms#ixzz10Lqi6V00