New Delhi, Feb 6.
Five more judges were sworn in as Supreme Court judges on Monday taking the strength of the top court to 32, two short of its full strength of 34. The court’s caseload stands at 69,511 cases as of Feb 1, 2023. Here’s a look at the new judges as seen through their observations (which are of course obiter), orders, judgements and news reports.
- Justice Pankaj Mithal, Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court
1.In a recent ruling, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed the appeal of a Yemeni national who had got his research visa extended on the basis of a claim that he had obtained admission for PhD in Jaipur. Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava upheld a single judge’s order that he was illegally overstaying and was liable to be immediately deported back to his country.
2.In another ruling, Mithal dismissed a PIL which had sought a direction from the court to restrain candidates of any political party from visiting any religious places during the campaign period which begins after polls are notified. The PIL had claimed that this would check the misuse of caste and religion to garner votes. CJ Mithal was sitting alongside Justice Sandeep Mehta.
3.As JK High Court Chief Justice, he rejected a PIL plea seeking prohibition of slaughtering of animals in the name of religion. Courts are slow to interfere in religious matters, he said, sitting with Justice Sindhu Sharma. Much depends on the traditions and customs of a particular religion, it said. That is a matter of evidence, it said. A priest Tek Chand had challenged the Constitutional validity of Section 28 of the Prevention of Cruelty to animals, 1960, and sought a ban on such sacrifices.
4.As JK High Court CJ, he made controversial remarks at an event held by an RSS-linked outfit, suggesting that inclusion of “secular” and “socialist” in the Preamble had “narrowed” India’s “spiritual image”. He was delivering the keynote lecture on “Dharma and the Constitution of India: The Interplay” at a function organised by the JK chapter of the Adhivakta Parishad in Jammu.
- Justice Sanjay Karol, Chief Justice of Patna High Court
1.As CJ he slapped fines on vice chancellors of three state universities for delays in holding examinations and publishing results. The fine of Rs 5000 was to be recovered from their personal income. The order came on a PIL filed in court seeking to have exams timely conducted for the benefit of students. The other judge on the bench was Justice Partha Sarthy.
2. Karol ruled that governments were under a constitutional and statutory obligation to protect transgenders from discrimination. He ordered that they be provided separate cells whether in judicial or police custody. The other judge on the bench was Justice S. Kumar.
3. He also ruled that citizens had the right to sanitation just as they have right to health, right to a healthy environment, right to education and dignity. Ordered public toilets for women in Patna and also directed that such basic facilities be provided for lawyers and clients alike in the High Court premises. He was sitting alongside Justice S. Kumar.
4. As Chief Justice he extended the court sitting hours by half an hour from 4.15 to 4.45 to deal exclusively with bail applications. The High Court has been flooded with bail applications after the state’s controversial prohibition law came into effect.
* Justice P. V. Sanjay Kumar, Chief Justice of Manipur High Court
1. Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar was part of an Andhra High Court bench led by former judge Madan B. Lokur which had struck down 4.5 per cent reservation for Muslims and minorities, both in jobs and admissions in central educational institutions. The High Court struck it down on the ground that it was a sub-quota for the minorities carved out of the 27 quotas for OBCs or Other Backward Classes (OBCs). The court said that the office order providing for the quota violated Articles 15(1) and 16(2) of the Constitution which prohibit discrimination based on religion. The bench rejected the central government’s contention that the sub-quota was provided on the basis of backwardness and not religion, and was meant for equitable distribution of benefits.
2.Sitting with then Hyderabad High Court Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, Justice Sanjay Kumar ruled in 2014 that the High Court shall continue to be the common court for both states of Andhra and Telangana till a separate High Court was set up in Andhra.
3.As Manipur High Court Chief Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar visited the Manipur Central jail where he said that detaining convicts after the expiry of their jail terms was a gross violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. He visited Manipur Central Jail, Sajiwa, with Justice Ahanthem Bimol, Chairman High Court Legal Services Committee as a part of the campaign to provide legal assistance to the convicts. He told convicts in an interaction inside the jail that they had a right to file appeals against the judgment order passed by subordinate Courts to the High Court or the Supreme Court and that if anyone wanted any help to do so it would be provided free of cost. They also inspected the living condition of prisoners and interacted with the jail inmates and officials.
* Ahsannuddin Amanullah, judge of the Patna High Court
1.As a judge of the Patna High Court, observed that societal approval of intimate personal relationships cannot be a basis for granting them recognition in the eyes of the law. He was sitting alongside Justice Purnendu Singh while dealing with a habeas corpus petition moved by one Amit Raj seeking production of his wife who was allegedly detained by her family members.
2.As part of a bench in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, he observed that a citizen would not be deprived of the right to protest on an issue merely because he had moved a constitutional court on the same issue. He was sitting alongside Justice B.S. Banumathi.
3.Amanullah, however, was in a minority of one in a five-judge bench in opposing the demolition of a wakf building near the Patna high Court. He recorded that the structure was irregular and not illegal, and the deficiency could be removed by bringing the height of the structure within ten meters in conformity with the byelaws. “Merely because the building in question is in proximity to the High Court, the same is necessarily required to be razed to the ground – cannot be a view that this court ought to approve, given that, in law, the affected party has a right to construct up to the height of 10 metres, subject to satisfying other conditions under the Act and/or the bye-laws.”
* Justice Manoj Misra, Judge, Allahabad High Court
1. In 2022, Justice Mishra slammed the CBI for failing to produce the post mortem reports of the victims of Nithari, prompting the agency to submit it by the next date of hearing. The key accused in the case Surender Koli has challenged his conviction and death sentence awarded in the case. He was sitting alongside Justice Sameer Jain. Koli was convicted for serial murders in the Noida village. He has been found guilty of rape and murder of several girl children and has been sentenced to death in at least 10 cases. Also gave the benefit of doubt to a murder accused in a 38-year-old case recently and acquitted him. In that case too, he was sitting with Justice Jain.
2. He issued notices to the Uttar Pradesh government on a plea against the use of facial recognition technology to record attendance of university staff. He was sitting along with Justice Mohammed Azhar Husain Idrisi. The university had linked biometrics-linked attendance to salary that would be eventually paid. This a staff member had claimed was violative of a citizen’s right to privacy.
3. He also dismissed a PIL which had sought a direction to the government to minimise crop loss of farmers due to movement of wild board and nilgais, both protected animals. Mishra, sitting with Justice Vikas Budhwar, said that the government was seized of the matter and was dealing with it.
