SC Broad Enough To Deal With Inappropriate Statements Made By Authorities: Junks Plea Against Remarks On Collegium System
The Supreme Court today dismissed a plea challenging the Bombay High Court's order dismissing a PIL against Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju and Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar over their remarks against the Collegium System and the Basic Structure Doctrine. The Bench was of the opinion that the observations made by the Bombay High Court in the matter were correct.
"We believe that the High Court is correct. Whether somebody has made an appropriate or an inappropriate statement...if any Authority has made an inappropriate statement, the observations that the Supreme Court are broad enough to deal with the same is a correct view", a bench of Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah observed while hearing the matter.
"What is it? Just to complete the circle of coming to the High Court", asked Justice Kaul to the petitioner when the matter was called out today.
The Bombay High Court had earlier observed that fair criticism of a judgment is permissible, and that the credibility of the Supreme Court is sky-high and it cannot be eroded or impinged by the statements of individuals.
“The credibility of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India is sky-high. It cannot be eroded or impinged by the statements of individuals.”, the division bench of Acting Chief Justice S.V.Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep V. Marne had observed while dismissing the matter.
The Court also noted that the Indian Constitution is supreme and sacrosanct and every citizen is bound by the Constitution and is expected to abide by the constitutional values.
The Court had further added that the constitutional institutions are to be respected by all, including constitutional authorities and persons holding constitutional posts.
For the background, in this case, the Bombay Lawyers Association had approached the High Court seeking directions to declare that the Law Minister and the Vice President have disqualified themselves to hold the constitutional post by their conduct and by attacking its institutions including Supreme Court.
The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Vice President and the Law Minister launched frontal attack on the institution of judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court in derogatory language without any recourse.
The Counsel further added that they are also guilty of committing contempt of Court by lowering the authority of the Supreme Court. Thus the petitioner sought directions to restrain them from discharging their duty as cabinet Minister of Union of India and as Vice President of India.
On the other hand, the Additional Solicitor General submitted that the PIL was filed for publicity purposes and that it is false and frivolous.
Cause Title: Bombay Lawyers Association v. Jagdeep Dhankar & Ors.