M A I N   N E W S

A Tribune Exclusive
No confrontation with legislature, says CJI
Maneesh Chhibber
Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, December 16
The Chief Justice of India, Mr Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, today asserted that there was no question of any confrontation between the Judiciary and the Legislature. In a free-wheeling interview here, the CJI said both the Judiciary and the Legislature were the creations of the Constitution and both were doing their respective jobs. “Speaking for myself, I don’t see any conflict between these two organs. Sometimes there is a communication gap while sometimes it is the media trying to make news out of nothing. The Judiciary and the Legislature are both governed by the Constitution. Both have to act within the purview of the Constitution. Our job is to interpret the Constitution and we will be abdicating our duty if we don’t do our job properly. If, for example, the judges have held that as per the Constitution, in corruption cases prior sanction is not necessary, they have only interpreted the Constitution. You can’t treat it as confrontation. I hope the Legislature does not treat it as such. The Legislature consists of very senior and learned people who are fully aware of the Constitution,” CJI Sabharwal said.

The CJI was answering a question relating to the recent criticism by some politicians, deriding the recent order of the Supreme Court with regard to corruption cases involving politicians and bureaucrats.

Asked if he was happy with the shape of the National Judicial Commission Bill, CJI Sabharwal said he was satisfied. “It will create a machinery by which we will be able to look into serious cases where the ultimate punishment of impeachment may not be necessary. It will give an opportunity to peers to look into complaints and take action less than impeachment. If the case merits the highest punishment of impeachment, then the procedure as defined will be followed,” he pointed out.

Asked for his comments on the burning issue of female foeticide, the CJI, who will preside over a conference on the issue at Patiala tomorrow, said he was all for setting up fast-track courts to deal with such cases. “Unless all cases pertaining to female foeticide are decided at jet speed on priority, the message that such a ghastly act will not be tolerated will not trickle down. Speedy trials will also ensure that people will be more forthcoming to give evidence against such actions. Also, if the message goes out that such cases will get top priority, it will go a long way in checking this menace,” CJI Sabharwal asserted.

He also said that educating the masses and spreading awareness on the subject would also help.

Asked if he still stood by his recent stand that the Judiciary was also prone to making mistakes, the blunt-speaking CJI denied having made any such statement. “What I had said is something that has already been said over a century ago. It is: we are final, therefore we are right. The converse is not true. It cannot be said that we are right and therefore we are final. Not only in India but in almost all democracies, including the USA, this holds true. Had there been a court higher than the Supreme Court, a percentage of judgments might have been reversed. But, since in India we are the apex court, we are final. I hope this will clear what I had said,” he said.

Asked to elaborate, CJI Sabharwal said judges decided what they thought was right according to the Constitution. “But these decisions are not made by computers. They are made by human beings. Two human beings, as we all know, don’t think alike. Many of the important judgments in this country have been delivered through divided opinion. This does not mean that the judges forming the minority opinion were wrong. This happens in other countries also. Also, our Constitution is a living document which goes on changing. What was right 100 years ago or even 50 years ago may not be right now. On November 14, when a student asked me why we were supreme, my response was that we are supreme because we are final,” he said.

When asked if he was of the opinion that speedier trial of the high and the mighty involved in criminal cases could be a step in the right direction, the CJI said he had been holding this view much before he became the CJI. “I have no doubt about it. Earlier, when I was not the CJI, I had expressed my views on this subject at a meeting where the President was also present. I have always held that cases of those who hold public positions should be put on the fast track. It is the need of the hour and sends a very positive signal.