Pages

Tuesday, July 8, 2025

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

   

I do a critical discourse on the ongoing controversy surrounding a corrupt judge in India, focusing on the judiciary’s role, government limitations, and political dynamics.

I highlight here statements made by India’s Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar at the National Law University, Kochi, where he openly criticized the Supreme Court and the Collegium system for shielding a corrupt judge despite clear evidence of wrongdoing. Dhankhar underscored the systemic failure whereby the government is powerless to initiate an FIR or investigation due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent that grants immunity to sitting judges. 

As independent citizen and Military Veteran I would like to emphasise that Judges Enjoy Immunity from Law and Scrutiny Both Ways,First they elect each other Judge within Home Grown Committee Secondly No Indian Law is applicable on them moreover No Law Enforcement Agencies can Investigate them. Consider a scenario when a Judge is Murdered,Killed in accident,there is theft in house then No Indian Law Enforcement Agency will investigate them,Judges Committee will take care of everything?Are they geared up for that? People of India must see how Judges will behave if unfortunate incident takes place.  


The Vice President emphasized that this judicial immunity has obstructed justice and eroded public trust in India’s judiciary, which is further compounded by the Collegium’s reluctance to allow investigation or FIR against the judge. He pointed out that attempts by the government to impeach the judge through parliamentary procedures would be lengthy and fraught with hurdles, including potential legal defenses and political boycotts by opposition parties like Congress.The current Chief Justice of India (CJI) and previous CJIs protecting the accused judge, which has shaken citizens’ faith in the judicial system.

There is  urgency for the present CJI, Justice B.R. Gavai, to break from past precedents and allow an FIR and a thorough inquiry by agencies such as the ED, CBI, and IB. The wider issue of judicial independence is being misinterpreted as unaccountability, leading to a backlog of over 5 crore pending cases that burden the public. It calls on the judiciary to restore its credibility by acting against corruption within its house and also highlights the Vice President’s repeated warnings to the CJI to take decisive action.


### Highlights  

- ⚖️ Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar openly criticizes the Supreme Court and Collegium for shielding a corrupt judge.  

- 🔍 Government is unable to file an FIR or investigate due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent granting judicial immunity.  

- 🕰️ Impeachment of the judge through Parliament is a lengthy and uncertain process, vulnerable to political maneuvering.  

- 🙅 Opposition party Congress has historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, stalling justice.  

- 📉 Public trust in India’s judiciary is severely eroded due to perceived protection of corrupt judges by the Collegium.  

- 🚨 Urgent call for Chief Justice B.R. Gavai to break the cycle and allow FIR and investigation against the judge.  

- 🏛️ Judicial independence is being conflated with unaccountability, contributing to massive case backlogs and public distress.  


### Key Insights  

- ⚖️ **Judicial Immunity and Its Consequences:** The 1990 Supreme Court ruling that protects sitting judges from FIRs has created an environment where alleged corruption within the judiciary cannot be probed through normal legal channels. This immunity, intended to protect judicial independence, has ironically resulted in a lack of accountability and undermined the rule of law. The situation exemplifies how legal precedents, while designed for one purpose, can have unintended consequences impacting governance and justice delivery.


- 🏛️ **Collegium System’s Accountability Deficit:** The Collegium, responsible for judicial appointments and administrative oversight, has been criticized for its opaque functioning and lack of accountability. The Vice President’s remarks highlight how this system has shielded a corrupt judge despite overwhelming evidence, raising serious questions about internal checks and balances within the judiciary. The Collegium’s autonomy, though important, requires mechanisms to ensure transparency and responsibility towards public interest.


- 🔄 **The Impeachment Process as a Double-Edged Sword:** While the constitutional process of impeachment provides a legal route to remove corrupt judges, its complexity and duration make it ineffective in urgent cases. The process involves parliamentary committees, voting, and presidential assent, during which the accused can mount a vigorous defense. This delay allows the accused to continue enjoying official privileges, which in this case includes salary and pension, thereby diluting the deterrent effect against judicial corruption.

- 🔍 **Role of Political Dynamics in Judicial Accountability:** Opposition parties, notably the Congress party, have historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, as referenced in the transcript. Such political strategies can impede the enforcement of judicial accountability, suggesting that judicial reform is not merely a legal issue but also a deeply political one. The interplay between judiciary, executive, and legislature becomes critical in ensuring checks and balances but can also become a tool for political expediency.


- 📉 **Erosion of Public Trust and Judicial Credibility:** The Vice President’s pointed criticism reflects a growing public disenchantment with the judiciary, fueled by delays, perceived protectionism, and lack of transparency. With over 5 crore pending cases, the judiciary’s backlog compounds the problem, making it appear inaccessible and inefficient to common citizens. This erosion of faith threatens the very foundation of democracy, where an independent and trusted judiciary is essential.


- 🚨 **Urgency for Proactive Leadership by the Chief Justice:** Justice B.R. Gavai, the current Chief Justice of India, is positioned as a pivotal figure who can restore judicial integrity by authorizing investigations and FIRs against corrupt judges. The transcript’s appeal to him underscores the need for reform-minded leadership within the judiciary that balances independence with accountability. His actions could set a precedent, distinguishing him from predecessors who defended the status quo.


- ⚠️ **Judicial Independence vs. Judicial Autocracy:** The discourse raises a fundamental question about the nature of judicial independence. While independence is crucial to prevent external interference, unchecked autonomy can lead to autocracy and impunity. The transcript warns against conflating independence with immunity from accountability, emphasizing that true judicial freedom must coexist with mechanisms that prevent abuse of power and ensure responsibility to the public and constitution.


In conclusion,Vice President Speech serves as a compelling critique of India’s judiciary’s current challenges, especially around internal accountability and political interference, and calls for urgent reforms to restore faith in the justice system. It highlights the delicate balance between protecting judicial independence and ensuring that no individual, regardless of position, is above the law.

Col Rajendra Shukla (Retd)

New Delhi


via Blogger https://ift.tt/Lx8Fs02
July 08, 2025 at 09:32AM
via Blogger https://ift.tt/8CU1xnr
July 08, 2025 at 10:13AM
via Blogger https://ift.tt/ZlGsbNx
July 08, 2025 at 11:13AM
via Blogger https://ift.tt/5l6wA3b
July 08, 2025 at 12:13PM

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

   

I do a critical discourse on the ongoing controversy surrounding a corrupt judge in India, focusing on the judiciary’s role, government limitations, and political dynamics.

I highlight here statements made by India’s Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar at the National Law University, Kochi, where he openly criticized the Supreme Court and the Collegium system for shielding a corrupt judge despite clear evidence of wrongdoing. Dhankhar underscored the systemic failure whereby the government is powerless to initiate an FIR or investigation due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent that grants immunity to sitting judges. 

As independent citizen and Military Veteran I would like to emphasise that Judges Enjoy Immunity from Law and Scrutiny Both Ways,First they elect each other Judge within Home Grown Committee Secondly No Indian Law is applicable on them moreover No Law Enforcement Agencies can Investigate them. Consider a scenario when a Judge is Murdered,Killed in accident,there is theft in house then No Indian Law Enforcement Agency will investigate them,Judges Committee will take care of everything?Are they geared up for that? People of India must see how Judges will behave if unfortunate incident takes place.  


The Vice President emphasized that this judicial immunity has obstructed justice and eroded public trust in India’s judiciary, which is further compounded by the Collegium’s reluctance to allow investigation or FIR against the judge. He pointed out that attempts by the government to impeach the judge through parliamentary procedures would be lengthy and fraught with hurdles, including potential legal defenses and political boycotts by opposition parties like Congress.The current Chief Justice of India (CJI) and previous CJIs protecting the accused judge, which has shaken citizens’ faith in the judicial system.

There is  urgency for the present CJI, Justice B.R. Gavai, to break from past precedents and allow an FIR and a thorough inquiry by agencies such as the ED, CBI, and IB. The wider issue of judicial independence is being misinterpreted as unaccountability, leading to a backlog of over 5 crore pending cases that burden the public. It calls on the judiciary to restore its credibility by acting against corruption within its house and also highlights the Vice President’s repeated warnings to the CJI to take decisive action.


### Highlights  

- ⚖️ Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar openly criticizes the Supreme Court and Collegium for shielding a corrupt judge.  

- 🔍 Government is unable to file an FIR or investigate due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent granting judicial immunity.  

- 🕰️ Impeachment of the judge through Parliament is a lengthy and uncertain process, vulnerable to political maneuvering.  

- 🙅 Opposition party Congress has historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, stalling justice.  

- 📉 Public trust in India’s judiciary is severely eroded due to perceived protection of corrupt judges by the Collegium.  

- 🚨 Urgent call for Chief Justice B.R. Gavai to break the cycle and allow FIR and investigation against the judge.  

- 🏛️ Judicial independence is being conflated with unaccountability, contributing to massive case backlogs and public distress.  


### Key Insights  

- ⚖️ **Judicial Immunity and Its Consequences:** The 1990 Supreme Court ruling that protects sitting judges from FIRs has created an environment where alleged corruption within the judiciary cannot be probed through normal legal channels. This immunity, intended to protect judicial independence, has ironically resulted in a lack of accountability and undermined the rule of law. The situation exemplifies how legal precedents, while designed for one purpose, can have unintended consequences impacting governance and justice delivery.


- 🏛️ **Collegium System’s Accountability Deficit:** The Collegium, responsible for judicial appointments and administrative oversight, has been criticized for its opaque functioning and lack of accountability. The Vice President’s remarks highlight how this system has shielded a corrupt judge despite overwhelming evidence, raising serious questions about internal checks and balances within the judiciary. The Collegium’s autonomy, though important, requires mechanisms to ensure transparency and responsibility towards public interest.


- 🔄 **The Impeachment Process as a Double-Edged Sword:** While the constitutional process of impeachment provides a legal route to remove corrupt judges, its complexity and duration make it ineffective in urgent cases. The process involves parliamentary committees, voting, and presidential assent, during which the accused can mount a vigorous defense. This delay allows the accused to continue enjoying official privileges, which in this case includes salary and pension, thereby diluting the deterrent effect against judicial corruption.

- 🔍 **Role of Political Dynamics in Judicial Accountability:** Opposition parties, notably the Congress party, have historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, as referenced in the transcript. Such political strategies can impede the enforcement of judicial accountability, suggesting that judicial reform is not merely a legal issue but also a deeply political one. The interplay between judiciary, executive, and legislature becomes critical in ensuring checks and balances but can also become a tool for political expediency.


- 📉 **Erosion of Public Trust and Judicial Credibility:** The Vice President’s pointed criticism reflects a growing public disenchantment with the judiciary, fueled by delays, perceived protectionism, and lack of transparency. With over 5 crore pending cases, the judiciary’s backlog compounds the problem, making it appear inaccessible and inefficient to common citizens. This erosion of faith threatens the very foundation of democracy, where an independent and trusted judiciary is essential.


- 🚨 **Urgency for Proactive Leadership by the Chief Justice:** Justice B.R. Gavai, the current Chief Justice of India, is positioned as a pivotal figure who can restore judicial integrity by authorizing investigations and FIRs against corrupt judges. The transcript’s appeal to him underscores the need for reform-minded leadership within the judiciary that balances independence with accountability. His actions could set a precedent, distinguishing him from predecessors who defended the status quo.


- ⚠️ **Judicial Independence vs. Judicial Autocracy:** The discourse raises a fundamental question about the nature of judicial independence. While independence is crucial to prevent external interference, unchecked autonomy can lead to autocracy and impunity. The transcript warns against conflating independence with immunity from accountability, emphasizing that true judicial freedom must coexist with mechanisms that prevent abuse of power and ensure responsibility to the public and constitution.


In conclusion,Vice President Speech serves as a compelling critique of India’s judiciary’s current challenges, especially around internal accountability and political interference, and calls for urgent reforms to restore faith in the justice system. It highlights the delicate balance between protecting judicial independence and ensuring that no individual, regardless of position, is above the law.

Col Rajendra Shukla (Retd)

New Delhi


via Blogger https://ift.tt/Lx8Fs02
July 08, 2025 at 09:32AM
via Blogger https://ift.tt/8CU1xnr
July 08, 2025 at 10:13AM
via Blogger https://ift.tt/ZlGsbNx
July 08, 2025 at 11:13AM

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

   

I do a critical discourse on the ongoing controversy surrounding a corrupt judge in India, focusing on the judiciary’s role, government limitations, and political dynamics.

I highlight here statements made by India’s Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar at the National Law University, Kochi, where he openly criticized the Supreme Court and the Collegium system for shielding a corrupt judge despite clear evidence of wrongdoing. Dhankhar underscored the systemic failure whereby the government is powerless to initiate an FIR or investigation due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent that grants immunity to sitting judges. 

As independent citizen and Military Veteran I would like to emphasise that Judges Enjoy Immunity from Law and Scrutiny Both Ways,First they elect each other Judge within Home Grown Committee Secondly No Indian Law is applicable on them moreover No Law Enforcement Agencies can Investigate them. Consider a scenario when a Judge is Murdered,Killed in accident,there is theft in house then No Indian Law Enforcement Agency will investigate them,Judges Committee will take care of everything?Are they geared up for that? People of India must see how Judges will behave if unfortunate incident takes place.  


The Vice President emphasized that this judicial immunity has obstructed justice and eroded public trust in India’s judiciary, which is further compounded by the Collegium’s reluctance to allow investigation or FIR against the judge. He pointed out that attempts by the government to impeach the judge through parliamentary procedures would be lengthy and fraught with hurdles, including potential legal defenses and political boycotts by opposition parties like Congress.The current Chief Justice of India (CJI) and previous CJIs protecting the accused judge, which has shaken citizens’ faith in the judicial system.

There is  urgency for the present CJI, Justice B.R. Gavai, to break from past precedents and allow an FIR and a thorough inquiry by agencies such as the ED, CBI, and IB. The wider issue of judicial independence is being misinterpreted as unaccountability, leading to a backlog of over 5 crore pending cases that burden the public. It calls on the judiciary to restore its credibility by acting against corruption within its house and also highlights the Vice President’s repeated warnings to the CJI to take decisive action.


### Highlights  

- ⚖️ Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar openly criticizes the Supreme Court and Collegium for shielding a corrupt judge.  

- 🔍 Government is unable to file an FIR or investigate due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent granting judicial immunity.  

- 🕰️ Impeachment of the judge through Parliament is a lengthy and uncertain process, vulnerable to political maneuvering.  

- 🙅 Opposition party Congress has historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, stalling justice.  

- 📉 Public trust in India’s judiciary is severely eroded due to perceived protection of corrupt judges by the Collegium.  

- 🚨 Urgent call for Chief Justice B.R. Gavai to break the cycle and allow FIR and investigation against the judge.  

- 🏛️ Judicial independence is being conflated with unaccountability, contributing to massive case backlogs and public distress.  


### Key Insights  

- ⚖️ **Judicial Immunity and Its Consequences:** The 1990 Supreme Court ruling that protects sitting judges from FIRs has created an environment where alleged corruption within the judiciary cannot be probed through normal legal channels. This immunity, intended to protect judicial independence, has ironically resulted in a lack of accountability and undermined the rule of law. The situation exemplifies how legal precedents, while designed for one purpose, can have unintended consequences impacting governance and justice delivery.


- 🏛️ **Collegium System’s Accountability Deficit:** The Collegium, responsible for judicial appointments and administrative oversight, has been criticized for its opaque functioning and lack of accountability. The Vice President’s remarks highlight how this system has shielded a corrupt judge despite overwhelming evidence, raising serious questions about internal checks and balances within the judiciary. The Collegium’s autonomy, though important, requires mechanisms to ensure transparency and responsibility towards public interest.


- 🔄 **The Impeachment Process as a Double-Edged Sword:** While the constitutional process of impeachment provides a legal route to remove corrupt judges, its complexity and duration make it ineffective in urgent cases. The process involves parliamentary committees, voting, and presidential assent, during which the accused can mount a vigorous defense. This delay allows the accused to continue enjoying official privileges, which in this case includes salary and pension, thereby diluting the deterrent effect against judicial corruption.

- 🔍 **Role of Political Dynamics in Judicial Accountability:** Opposition parties, notably the Congress party, have historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, as referenced in the transcript. Such political strategies can impede the enforcement of judicial accountability, suggesting that judicial reform is not merely a legal issue but also a deeply political one. The interplay between judiciary, executive, and legislature becomes critical in ensuring checks and balances but can also become a tool for political expediency.


- 📉 **Erosion of Public Trust and Judicial Credibility:** The Vice President’s pointed criticism reflects a growing public disenchantment with the judiciary, fueled by delays, perceived protectionism, and lack of transparency. With over 5 crore pending cases, the judiciary’s backlog compounds the problem, making it appear inaccessible and inefficient to common citizens. This erosion of faith threatens the very foundation of democracy, where an independent and trusted judiciary is essential.


- 🚨 **Urgency for Proactive Leadership by the Chief Justice:** Justice B.R. Gavai, the current Chief Justice of India, is positioned as a pivotal figure who can restore judicial integrity by authorizing investigations and FIRs against corrupt judges. The transcript’s appeal to him underscores the need for reform-minded leadership within the judiciary that balances independence with accountability. His actions could set a precedent, distinguishing him from predecessors who defended the status quo.


- ⚠️ **Judicial Independence vs. Judicial Autocracy:** The discourse raises a fundamental question about the nature of judicial independence. While independence is crucial to prevent external interference, unchecked autonomy can lead to autocracy and impunity. The transcript warns against conflating independence with immunity from accountability, emphasizing that true judicial freedom must coexist with mechanisms that prevent abuse of power and ensure responsibility to the public and constitution.


In conclusion,Vice President Speech serves as a compelling critique of India’s judiciary’s current challenges, especially around internal accountability and political interference, and calls for urgent reforms to restore faith in the justice system. It highlights the delicate balance between protecting judicial independence and ensuring that no individual, regardless of position, is above the law.

Col Rajendra Shukla (Retd)

New Delhi


via Blogger https://ift.tt/Lx8Fs02
July 08, 2025 at 09:32AM
via Blogger https://ift.tt/8CU1xnr
July 08, 2025 at 10:13AM

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

   

I do a critical discourse on the ongoing controversy surrounding a corrupt judge in India, focusing on the judiciary’s role, government limitations, and political dynamics.

I highlight here statements made by India’s Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar at the National Law University, Kochi, where he openly criticized the Supreme Court and the Collegium system for shielding a corrupt judge despite clear evidence of wrongdoing. Dhankhar underscored the systemic failure whereby the government is powerless to initiate an FIR or investigation due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent that grants immunity to sitting judges. 

As independent citizen and Military Veteran I would like to emphasise that Judges Enjoy Immunity from Law and Scrutiny Both Ways,First they elect each other Judge within Home Grown Committee Secondly No Indian Law is applicable on them moreover No Law Enforcement Agencies can Investigate them. Consider a scenario when a Judge is Murdered,Killed in accident,there is theft in house then No Indian Law Enforcement Agency will investigate them,Judges Committee will take care of everything?Are they geared up for that? People of India must see how Judges will behave if unfortunate incident takes place.  


The Vice President emphasized that this judicial immunity has obstructed justice and eroded public trust in India’s judiciary, which is further compounded by the Collegium’s reluctance to allow investigation or FIR against the judge. He pointed out that attempts by the government to impeach the judge through parliamentary procedures would be lengthy and fraught with hurdles, including potential legal defenses and political boycotts by opposition parties like Congress.The current Chief Justice of India (CJI) and previous CJIs protecting the accused judge, which has shaken citizens’ faith in the judicial system.

There is  urgency for the present CJI, Justice B.R. Gavai, to break from past precedents and allow an FIR and a thorough inquiry by agencies such as the ED, CBI, and IB. The wider issue of judicial independence is being misinterpreted as unaccountability, leading to a backlog of over 5 crore pending cases that burden the public. It calls on the judiciary to restore its credibility by acting against corruption within its house and also highlights the Vice President’s repeated warnings to the CJI to take decisive action.


### Highlights  

- ⚖️ Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar openly criticizes the Supreme Court and Collegium for shielding a corrupt judge.  

- 🔍 Government is unable to file an FIR or investigate due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent granting judicial immunity.  

- 🕰️ Impeachment of the judge through Parliament is a lengthy and uncertain process, vulnerable to political maneuvering.  

- 🙅 Opposition party Congress has historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, stalling justice.  

- 📉 Public trust in India’s judiciary is severely eroded due to perceived protection of corrupt judges by the Collegium.  

- 🚨 Urgent call for Chief Justice B.R. Gavai to break the cycle and allow FIR and investigation against the judge.  

- 🏛️ Judicial independence is being conflated with unaccountability, contributing to massive case backlogs and public distress.  


### Key Insights  

- ⚖️ **Judicial Immunity and Its Consequences:** The 1990 Supreme Court ruling that protects sitting judges from FIRs has created an environment where alleged corruption within the judiciary cannot be probed through normal legal channels. This immunity, intended to protect judicial independence, has ironically resulted in a lack of accountability and undermined the rule of law. The situation exemplifies how legal precedents, while designed for one purpose, can have unintended consequences impacting governance and justice delivery.


- 🏛️ **Collegium System’s Accountability Deficit:** The Collegium, responsible for judicial appointments and administrative oversight, has been criticized for its opaque functioning and lack of accountability. The Vice President’s remarks highlight how this system has shielded a corrupt judge despite overwhelming evidence, raising serious questions about internal checks and balances within the judiciary. The Collegium’s autonomy, though important, requires mechanisms to ensure transparency and responsibility towards public interest.


- 🔄 **The Impeachment Process as a Double-Edged Sword:** While the constitutional process of impeachment provides a legal route to remove corrupt judges, its complexity and duration make it ineffective in urgent cases. The process involves parliamentary committees, voting, and presidential assent, during which the accused can mount a vigorous defense. This delay allows the accused to continue enjoying official privileges, which in this case includes salary and pension, thereby diluting the deterrent effect against judicial corruption.

- 🔍 **Role of Political Dynamics in Judicial Accountability:** Opposition parties, notably the Congress party, have historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, as referenced in the transcript. Such political strategies can impede the enforcement of judicial accountability, suggesting that judicial reform is not merely a legal issue but also a deeply political one. The interplay between judiciary, executive, and legislature becomes critical in ensuring checks and balances but can also become a tool for political expediency.


- 📉 **Erosion of Public Trust and Judicial Credibility:** The Vice President’s pointed criticism reflects a growing public disenchantment with the judiciary, fueled by delays, perceived protectionism, and lack of transparency. With over 5 crore pending cases, the judiciary’s backlog compounds the problem, making it appear inaccessible and inefficient to common citizens. This erosion of faith threatens the very foundation of democracy, where an independent and trusted judiciary is essential.


- 🚨 **Urgency for Proactive Leadership by the Chief Justice:** Justice B.R. Gavai, the current Chief Justice of India, is positioned as a pivotal figure who can restore judicial integrity by authorizing investigations and FIRs against corrupt judges. The transcript’s appeal to him underscores the need for reform-minded leadership within the judiciary that balances independence with accountability. His actions could set a precedent, distinguishing him from predecessors who defended the status quo.


- ⚠️ **Judicial Independence vs. Judicial Autocracy:** The discourse raises a fundamental question about the nature of judicial independence. While independence is crucial to prevent external interference, unchecked autonomy can lead to autocracy and impunity. The transcript warns against conflating independence with immunity from accountability, emphasizing that true judicial freedom must coexist with mechanisms that prevent abuse of power and ensure responsibility to the public and constitution.


In conclusion,Vice President Speech serves as a compelling critique of India’s judiciary’s current challenges, especially around internal accountability and political interference, and calls for urgent reforms to restore faith in the justice system. It highlights the delicate balance between protecting judicial independence and ensuring that no individual, regardless of position, is above the law.

Col Rajendra Shukla (Retd)

New Delhi


via Blogger https://ift.tt/Lx8Fs02
July 08, 2025 at 09:32AM

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

   

I do a critical discourse on the ongoing controversy surrounding a corrupt judge in India, focusing on the judiciary’s role, government limitations, and political dynamics.

I highlight here statements made by India’s Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar at the National Law University, Kochi, where he openly criticized the Supreme Court and the Collegium system for shielding a corrupt judge despite clear evidence of wrongdoing. Dhankhar underscored the systemic failure whereby the government is powerless to initiate an FIR or investigation due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent that grants immunity to sitting judges. 

As independent citizen and Military Veteran I would like to emphasise that Judges Enjoy Immunity from Law and Scrutiny Both Ways,First they elect each other Judge within Home Grown Committee Secondly No Indian Law is applicable on them moreover No Law Enforcement Agencies can Investigate them. Consider a scenario when a Judge is Murdered,Killed in accident,there is theft in house then No Indian Law Enforcement Agency will investigate them,Judges Committee will take care of everything?Are they geared up for that? People of India must see how Judges will behave if unfortunate incident takes place.  


The Vice President emphasized that this judicial immunity has obstructed justice and eroded public trust in India’s judiciary, which is further compounded by the Collegium’s reluctance to allow investigation or FIR against the judge. He pointed out that attempts by the government to impeach the judge through parliamentary procedures would be lengthy and fraught with hurdles, including potential legal defenses and political boycotts by opposition parties like Congress.The current Chief Justice of India (CJI) and previous CJIs protecting the accused judge, which has shaken citizens’ faith in the judicial system.

There is  urgency for the present CJI, Justice B.R. Gavai, to break from past precedents and allow an FIR and a thorough inquiry by agencies such as the ED, CBI, and IB. The wider issue of judicial independence is being misinterpreted as unaccountability, leading to a backlog of over 5 crore pending cases that burden the public. It calls on the judiciary to restore its credibility by acting against corruption within its house and also highlights the Vice President’s repeated warnings to the CJI to take decisive action.


### Highlights  

- ⚖️ Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar openly criticizes the Supreme Court and Collegium for shielding a corrupt judge.  

- 🔍 Government is unable to file an FIR or investigate due to a 1990 Supreme Court precedent granting judicial immunity.  

- 🕰️ Impeachment of the judge through Parliament is a lengthy and uncertain process, vulnerable to political maneuvering.  

- 🙅 Opposition party Congress has historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, stalling justice.  

- 📉 Public trust in India’s judiciary is severely eroded due to perceived protection of corrupt judges by the Collegium.  

- 🚨 Urgent call for Chief Justice B.R. Gavai to break the cycle and allow FIR and investigation against the judge.  

- 🏛️ Judicial independence is being conflated with unaccountability, contributing to massive case backlogs and public distress.  


### Key Insights  

- ⚖️ **Judicial Immunity and Its Consequences:** The 1990 Supreme Court ruling that protects sitting judges from FIRs has created an environment where alleged corruption within the judiciary cannot be probed through normal legal channels. This immunity, intended to protect judicial independence, has ironically resulted in a lack of accountability and undermined the rule of law. The situation exemplifies how legal precedents, while designed for one purpose, can have unintended consequences impacting governance and justice delivery.


- 🏛️ **Collegium System’s Accountability Deficit:** The Collegium, responsible for judicial appointments and administrative oversight, has been criticized for its opaque functioning and lack of accountability. The Vice President’s remarks highlight how this system has shielded a corrupt judge despite overwhelming evidence, raising serious questions about internal checks and balances within the judiciary. The Collegium’s autonomy, though important, requires mechanisms to ensure transparency and responsibility towards public interest.


- 🔄 **The Impeachment Process as a Double-Edged Sword:** While the constitutional process of impeachment provides a legal route to remove corrupt judges, its complexity and duration make it ineffective in urgent cases. The process involves parliamentary committees, voting, and presidential assent, during which the accused can mount a vigorous defense. This delay allows the accused to continue enjoying official privileges, which in this case includes salary and pension, thereby diluting the deterrent effect against judicial corruption.

- 🔍 **Role of Political Dynamics in Judicial Accountability:** Opposition parties, notably the Congress party, have historically boycotted impeachment proceedings, as referenced in the transcript. Such political strategies can impede the enforcement of judicial accountability, suggesting that judicial reform is not merely a legal issue but also a deeply political one. The interplay between judiciary, executive, and legislature becomes critical in ensuring checks and balances but can also become a tool for political expediency.


- 📉 **Erosion of Public Trust and Judicial Credibility:** The Vice President’s pointed criticism reflects a growing public disenchantment with the judiciary, fueled by delays, perceived protectionism, and lack of transparency. With over 5 crore pending cases, the judiciary’s backlog compounds the problem, making it appear inaccessible and inefficient to common citizens. This erosion of faith threatens the very foundation of democracy, where an independent and trusted judiciary is essential.


- 🚨 **Urgency for Proactive Leadership by the Chief Justice:** Justice B.R. Gavai, the current Chief Justice of India, is positioned as a pivotal figure who can restore judicial integrity by authorizing investigations and FIRs against corrupt judges. The transcript’s appeal to him underscores the need for reform-minded leadership within the judiciary that balances independence with accountability. His actions could set a precedent, distinguishing him from predecessors who defended the status quo.


- ⚠️ **Judicial Independence vs. Judicial Autocracy:** The discourse raises a fundamental question about the nature of judicial independence. While independence is crucial to prevent external interference, unchecked autonomy can lead to autocracy and impunity. The transcript warns against conflating independence with immunity from accountability, emphasizing that true judicial freedom must coexist with mechanisms that prevent abuse of power and ensure responsibility to the public and constitution.


In conclusion,Vice President Speech serves as a compelling critique of India’s judiciary’s current challenges, especially around internal accountability and political interference, and calls for urgent reforms to restore faith in the justice system. It highlights the delicate balance between protecting judicial independence and ensuring that no individual, regardless of position, is above the law.

Col Rajendra Shukla (Retd)

New Delhi

Saturday, July 5, 2025

The frequent judicial interventions by the Supreme Court of India

 ### Summary


This Article presents a detailed critique of the frequent judicial interventions by the Supreme Court of India in administrative and governmental actions, using the example of Bihar's voter list revision process initiated by the Election Commission. Arguement is that whenever a positive or reformative step is taken by any government department, especially by the Election Commission, it often faces immediate legal challenges, mainly from opposition political parties and activist lawyers who invoke fundamental rights under Article 32 of the Constitution to stall or stop such initiatives. 


In Bihar, a special intensive revision of the voter list was launched ahead of the November elections to verify the authenticity and eligibility of voters, aiming to remove duplicate or fraudulent entries, including those belonging to illegal migrants. This process, however, was met with fierce opposition, including from some political parties and NGOs like the Association for Democratic Rights (ADR), who filed petitions in the Supreme Court to halt the exercise. The opposition raised concerns about alleged violations of fundamental rights and the use of documents like caste certificates or family registers for verification, which are being practical and accessible for most voters.

It is highlighted the larger problem of multiple voter IDs held by individuals in different states leading to electoral malpractice. Despite voluntary linking of voter IDs with Aadhaar to curb such fraud, many have not complied, and enforcement remains weak. A notable example mentioned is former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, who reportedly held three voter IDs simultaneously without facing any penal consequences.

Let us discusses the Supreme Court’s shifting role over the years. Earlier, during the Congress-led UPA government, the judiciary played a more restrained role, but under the current Modi government, it has increasingly adopted an oppositional stance, often perceived as obstructing government initiatives. It is seen certain lawyers and judges of colluding to undermine government policies by repeatedly invoking constitutional provisions to stall governance.

Further,here  highlighted the judiciary's failure to address the huge backlog of criminal and civil cases in courts, questioning whether justice is truly being delivered. The judiciary's focus on high-profile cases and the protection of political interests is contrasted with neglect of ordinary citizens’ cases.

That is why I call for the Election Commission’s ongoing voter list verification in Bihar to continue without judicial interference, emphasizing that the process is lawful, necessary, and beneficial for the integrity of elections.The continual Supreme Court interventions in day-to-day government functioning risk politicizing the judiciary and eroding democratic governance. 

I ask readers for their opinion on whether the Supreme Court should intervene in such administrative matters or allow government agencies to function unhindered.


### Highlights


- 📋 Bihar’s voter list intensive revision aims to remove duplicate and illegal voter entries before November elections.

- ⚖️ Opposition parties and NGOs have challenged the revision in the Supreme Court citing fundamental rights violations.

- 🗳️ Multiple voter IDs per person remain a major electoral fraud issue across India.

- 🏛️ Supreme Court increasingly seen as obstructing government reforms under the current political regime.

- 🔍 Verification documents like caste certificates and family registers are practical and widely accessible for voter verification in Bihar.

- ⏳ Huge backlog of pending criminal and civil cases highlights judiciary’s failure to deliver timely justice.

- 🔥 Judicial activism risks politicizing the Supreme Court and undermining democratic governance.


### Key Insights


- ⚖️ **Judicial Overreach and Governance:** The Supreme Court’s frequent intervention in government initiatives, especially those related to electoral reforms, often leads to delays and frustration in implementing necessary measures. While judicial review is crucial for protecting citizens’ rights, excessive interference in administrative functions can paralyze governance. The Bihar voter list revision case exemplifies this tension, where the court’s involvement is perceived as siding with political interests rather than upholding justice impartially.


- 🗳️ **Electoral Integrity at Stake:** The presence of multiple voter IDs held by individuals in different states undermines the credibility of elections. Despite efforts like Aadhaar linking, enforcement remains weak due to legal loopholes and lack of stringent action. Bihar’s revision process is critical in cleansing the rolls to prevent electoral manipulation by illegal voters, including potential migrants from neighboring countries, which is a sensitive and politically charged issue.


- 📜 **Practicality of Verification Documents:** The documents required for voter verification—passport, caste certificate, birth certificate, or family register—are not arbitrary burdens but practical and accessible means for most voters. This counters the opposition’s narrative that the process is exclusionary or oppressive, emphasizing that grassroots-level officials like village secretaries and booth-level officers facilitate the process.


- ⚔️ **Politicization of the Judiciary:** There is concerns about how the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, has evolved into a platform where certain lawyers and judges act in a manner perceived as favoring opposition interests. This politicization risks undermining public trust in the judiciary as an impartial arbiter and raises questions about the balance between judicial activism and judicial restraint.

- 🕰️ **Judicial Inefficiency and Backlog:** Despite the Supreme Court’s high-profile activism, the justice delivery system suffers from massive pendency of cases, including criminal cases that directly affect public safety and individual freedoms. This contrast highlights a gap between judicial energy directed at politically sensitive cases versus the systemic neglect of everyday justice needs.


- 🔄 **Historical Comparison of Judicial Behavior:** The  Supreme Court’s approach during the UPA era with the current regime, suggesting that the judiciary was less confrontational before but has since adopted a more adversarial role. This historical perspective invites reflection on the dynamic nature of judicial behavior and the influence of political contexts on judicial independence.

Need to Protect Institutional Autonomy:** The importance of allowing constitutional bodies like the Election Commission, Police, CBI, and ED to perform their functions without undue judicial interference, as long as they operate within legal frameworks. Overreach by courts can demobilize these institutions, which are essential for governance and law enforcement, ultimately harming the democratic process.

The complex interplay between judiciary, politics, and governance in India, focusing on the contentious issue of voter list verification in Bihar underscores the challenges of balancing constitutional rights with the need for administrative efficiency and electoral integrity. A careful reevaluation of how and when courts should intervene in government affairs, warning against the dangers of judicial overreach that could stifle reforms and weaken democratic institutions. I invite readers to reflect on the role of the Supreme Court—whether as a neutral guardian of justice or a political actor—and the implications this has for India’s democracy.

Jai Hind Jai Bharat

हमें बाहर दुश्मन ढूंढने की आवश्यकता नहीं वो तो अंदर दिखता ही है

 


 हमारे घर के अंदर बाहर वाले तो जो कर रहे हैं वो कर ही रहे हैं। हम लोग आज विषय लेने वाले हैं कि बांग्लादेश में ऑपरेशन सिंदूर के बाद खासतौर से बांग्लादेश में क्या गतिविधि गहराई से चल रही है जिसको भारत सरकार मेरे ख्याल से निश्चित रूप से ऑब्जर्व करके रखा होगा या ऑब्जर्व कर रही होगी। इधर भारत के अंदर जम्मू कश्मीर विषय कैसे उठाया जा रहा है और तीसरी तरफ असीम मुनीर या  पाकिस्तान कैसे कर रहा था। चौथी बात यह भी है कि जो जम्मू कश्मीर में हुआ पहलगाम में जो कुछ हुआ उसके पीछे केवल पाकिस्तान नहीं था। जब हम ऑपरेशन सिंदूर कर रहे थे तो तीन देश सामने थे।

वो एक बड़ा षड्यंत्र था। भारत में आग फैलाने का षड्यंत्र, भारत को झुलसाने का षड्यंत्र और उनको उम्मीद थी कि भारत में ऐसा हो जाएगा तो एक तरफ से बांग्लादेश, एक तरफ से चाइना और एक तरफ से पाकिस्तान भारत के अंदर डिस्टरबेंस करेगा। ये वही डिस्टरबेंस जो जिना करना चाहता था। ये वही डिस्टरबेंस जो जिसको करके जिना हिंदुस्तान को कब्जा करना चाहता था। उस पॉलिसी को इंप्लीमेंट करने के लिए ये सारा षड्यंत्र चल रहा था। एक षड्यंत्र यह भी था कि मोदी जी किस प्रकार से भारत में कमजोर हो और उसके लिए डोनाल्ड ट्रंप और असीम मुनीर बैठकर भी कर रहे थे और एक षड्यंत्र यह भी था कि चाइना किस प्रकार से भारत को डिस्प्यूटेड करे वो हमने सबने राजनाथ जी का स्टेटमेंट देखा होगा जिसमें राजनाथ जी ने जॉइंट स्टेटमेंट साइन करने से मना कर दिया और साथ में उन्होंने कहा कि पहलगाम की घटना दुर्दंत घटना अगर नहीं है तो संसार की कोई घटना और इससे ज्यादा दुर्दता क्या हो सकती है जो संप्रदाय पूछकर महिलाओं और बच्चों के सामने पुरुषों को निशंस हत्या की जाए। वो एक चाइनीस षड्यंत्र था। हालांकि राजनाथ जी जैसा एक एक बड़ा नेता वहां गया था। इसलिए उनको किसी पूछने बताने की आवश्यकता नहीं। उन्होंने सीधा-सीधा उसको फ्रंट लेते हुए और सीधा क्फ्रंट किया चाइना और पाकिस्तान के इस षड्यंत्र से। तो हम वहां से निकल आए। 

अभी एक और षड्यंत्र ये चल रहा है कि किस प्रकार से यूएनओ मेंकि यूएन सिक्योरिटी काउंसिल के अंदर इस समय एक महीने के लिए जुलाई के एक महीने के लिए पाकिस्तान को प्रिसाइड करने का अवसर मिला है। पाकिस्तान के स्थाई सदस्य ने जो जो यूएनओ में स्थाई सदस्य हैं उन्होंने यूएससी में प्रेस कॉन्फ्रेंस करके यूनाइटेड सिक्योरिटी काउंसिल में प्रेस कॉन्फ्रेंस करके उन्होंने ये स्टेटमेंट दिया कि भारत इसमें हम जम्मू कश्मीर विषय उठाने वाले हैं। उनका कहना है कि जो एजेंडा है जो उस समय का एजेंडा है यूएससी के अंदर का एजेंडा था वो रेजोल्यूशन भारत पास करेगा। वो रेजोल्यूशन कुछ और नहीं। उनके शब्दों में वो प्लिसाइड का है और हम लगातार कहते आए हैं क्योंकि पाकिस्तान ने वो रेजोल्यूशन माना ही नहीं क्योंकि पाकिस्तान को पाक ऊपर जम्मू कश्मीर पहले खाली करना था उसके बाद हमको पीमिसाइड जैसे कदम उठाने थे। पाकिस्तान ने कभी वो हिस्सा खाली नहीं किया। लेकिन हमने वहां पर चुनाव करवाकर पॉपुलर गवर्नमेंट बनाई और पॉपुलर गवर्नमेंट बनाते हुए 2019 के 5 अगस्त को हमने आर्टिकल 370 का भी अंतिम संस्कार कर दिया। हमने डेमोक्रेटिक तरीके से जम्मू कश्मीर चलाया।

लेकिन वो जम्मू कश्मीर जो पाकिस्तान के कब्जे में है वो कभी उन्होंने मुक्त नहीं किया। इसलिए इस तरह का रेज़ोल्यूशन हमारे ऊपर लागू नहीं हो सकता। हालांकि उस रेजोल्यूशन में एक और बात थी। वो रेजोल्यूशन ये कहता है कि भारतकि वो एक्सेशन भारत में हो चुका है। भारत ने एक्सेशन में इसलिए डिले किया क्योंकि भारत प्रिविसाइड करवाना चाहता था। ये नेहरू जी की कारस्थानी थी कि वो  प्रिविसाइड करवाना चाहते थे। ऐसा यू एनओ के अंदर बात उठी। प्रिविसाइड करवाना चाहता था। इस बात को यूनाइटेड नेशन सिक्योरिटी काउंसिल की यूएसीआईपी यूनाइटेड नेशन यूनाइटेशन कमीशन फॉर इंडियन पाकिस्तान यूएनसीआईपी उसको कहते हैं उसने रेोल्यूशन पास किया थाकि भारत ऐसा करवाना चाहता है इसलिए उस पर हमने सवाल पूछे थे उनसे उस समय हमने उनसे पूछा कि जब प्रीविसाइड होगा तो पाका कुपट जम्मू एंड कश्मीर किसके पास होगा तो उन्होंने कहा भारत के पास होगा हमने कहा सेनाएं किसकी होंगी उन्होंने कहा भारत की होंगी। हमने कहा उसका देखरेख कौन करेगा? उन्होंने कहा भारत करेगा। हमने कहा किसके संरक्षण में भी डिसाइड होगा? तो उन्होंने कहा भारत में उन्होंने कहा भारत के संरक्षण में होगा। 

भारत सरकार ने उस समय यूनाइटेड नेशन कमीशन फॉर इंडियन एंड पाकिस्तान से पांच प्रश्न किए थे और पांचों का उत्तर भारत के पक्ष में आया था। पहली कंडीशन ये थी कि पाकिस्तान को पाक ऑक्यूपाइड जम्मू कश्मीर भारत को सौंपना होगा। जब इस जिसके बाद वहां पर यह गतिविधि हो सकती वह उस बात पे तो अ है कहता है प्लीसाइड मांग रहा है लेकिन वो इस बात को नहीं स्वीकार करता कि उसने कब्जा करके रखा हालांकि ये हम सब जानते हैं कि कोफिना साहब और बान की मूं ये दो सेक्रेटरी जनरल खुलकर बोल चुके हैं यूनाइटेड नेशन सिक्योरिटी काउंसिल के अंदर अब भारत और पाकिस्तान का कोई डिस्प्यूट नहीं बचा क्योंकि शिमला समझौते के बाद वो बटरल हो गया था शिमला शिमला समझौते में भारत और पाकिस्तान ने यह तय किया कि हम दोनों बैठकर जम्मू कश्मीर सॉल्व करेंगे। हालांकि शिमला समझौते के समय पाकड़ जम्मू एंड कश्मीर भारत सरकार वापस ले सकती थी। लेकिन उस समय इंदिरा गांधी ने ऐसा कोई प्रस्ताव नहीं रखा बल्कि जुल्फिकार अली भुट्टो या उनके जो प्रतिनिधि आए थे उन्होंने आग्रह किया कि अगर कश्मीर भी आप ले लोगे तो फिर हमें पाकिस्तान में मुंह दिखाना मुश्किल हो जाएगा। थोड़ा समय दीजिए। वह समय 1972 से लेकर और अब 2025 हो गया। वो समय कभी नहीं आया। पाकिस्तान दुष्ट है। योगी जी के शब्दों में वो उसकी पूंछ टेढ़ी है। वो कभी सीधी नहीं हो सकती। लेकिन वो बटरल इशू हो गया। ये एक उपलब्धि कही जा सकती है। जब वो बटरल इशू हो गया तो यूनाइटेड नेशन रेोल्यूशन का क्या मतलब है? और अगर यूनाइटेड नेशन रेज़ोल्यूशन फॉलो भी किया जाए तो सबसे पहले पाकिस्तान को पाक  कब्ज़ा जम्मू कश्मीर को भारत को सौंपना होगा।

जहां हमारी एडमिनिस्ट्रेशन में हमारी सरपरस्ती में पीवीसाइड का प्रावधान हो सकता है। हालांकि जैसा मैंने कहा कि हमने वहां बाकायदा पॉपुलर गवर्नमेंट बनाई। उस गवर्नमेंट ने रेोल्यूशन पास किया शेख अब्दुल्ला की अध्यक्षता में और जबकि हम महाराजा हरी सिंह उस पर साइन कर चुके थे देश में जैसे सारी रियासतों का अधिमिलन हुआ था वैसे ही उसका भी अधिमिलन हुआ था। लेकिन फिर भी भारत सरकार ने वहां पॉपुलर चुनाव करवाकर फिर बनी सरकार से फिर से अनुमोदन करवाया था ताकि कोई कंफ्यूजन संसार को ना रह जाए। अब ऐसी परिस्थिति में केवल एक ही काम रह जाता है और वो है कि पाक कब्ज़ा  जम्मू कश्मीर भारत को कम मिलेगा। लेकिन वो षड्यंत्रों के महर्षि हैं। वो षड्यंत्र लगातार कर रहे हैं। हालांकि हमारे यहां की कांग्रेस पार्टी जो कि मुख्य विपक्षी पार्टी है उन्होंने एक सवाल खड़ा किया। उन्होंने कहा भारत सरकार क्या कर रही थी? जो वो उनको प्रिसाइडिंग ऑफिसर बन गए। पहली बात तो यह है कि अस्थाई अस्थाई सदस्यता रूटीन में होती है। अस्थाई सदस्य अगर वो है तो वो प्रिसाइड करेगा। ये वहां के रेगुलेशन में है। लेकिन उसके प्रिसाइड करने मात्र से क्या यह कहा जा सकता है कि यूएससी के अंदर वो कुछ कर पाएगा? आप याद करिए कि वो तो यूएससी के अस्थाई सदस्य तब भी थे जब हम ऑपरेशन सिंदूर चला रहे थे। उसने तब मीटिंग भी बुलाई थी और ऑपरेशन सिंदूर के विषय में भारत की डिप्लोमेसी ने उसको उसी यूएससी के अंदर अलग-थलग कर दिया था। 14 सदस्यों ने में से किसी ने भी उसका साथ नहीं दिया था। 14 मैं कहता हूं पांच स्थाई और 10 अस्थाई और वो 10 में पाकिस्तान शामिल है। तो बाकी के 14 बचते हैं पाकिस्तान को छोड़कर। उन्होंने इसका समर्थन नहीं किया था। इसका मतलब है भारत की डिप्लोमेसी कितनी स्ट्रांग है। अब वो अगर वहां प्रिसाइड भी करेगा तो क्या यूएएससी यूनाइटेड नेशन सिक्योरिटी काउंसिल के बाकी सदस्यों केपरे चला जाएगा वो यूनिलटरल कर लेगा अकेले कर लेगा।

इसलिए जब सवाल खड़ा करती है कांग्रेस तो उसको यह सोचना भी चाहिए कि भारत की डिप्लोमेसी आज कितनी स्ट्रांग है कि यूएससी का सदस्य होने के बावजूद वहां 15 में से 14 सदस्यों ने पाकिस्तान को ऑपरेशन सिंदूर के समय पर धता बताई थी और कहा था कि लश्कर तैबा और जैश-ए-मोहम्मद क्या तुम्हारे आउटफिट नहीं है क्या? तुम्हारे ऑर्गेनाइजेशन नहीं है क्या? तुम्हारे देश में भरण पोषण नहीं होता। जाओ पहले उनको बंद करो। बाद में सिक्योरिटी काउंसिल में बात करना।

लेकिन उनको किसी को भारत के अंदर हो रहे षड्यंत्र दिखाई नहीं देते।चीफ जस्टिस ऑफ इंडिया ने एक स्टेटमेंट दे दिया। उन्होंने कहा आर्टिकल 370 खत्म किया गया या 35 कैपिटल ए या कॉन्स्टिट्यूशन जम्मू कश्मीर का खत्म किया गया। ये डॉक्टर अंबेडकर के विचार के अनुरूप है। क्योंकि अगर आप कॉन्सिट्यूशन असेंबली डिबेट पर जाएंगे तो वहां पर मिलेगा कि डॉ अंबेडकर एक संविधान बनाने में सफल हो गए। लेकिन पाक लेकिन जो जम्मू कश्मीर का हिस्सा था वो नेहरू जी की वजह से अलग संविधान बनाने में सफल रहा था। अलग संविधान वो एक्चुअली इनलार्ज स्टेट लिस्ट थी। यानी कि राज्य की जो लिस्ट है वो वहां बनाने का रख दिया गया था। अब वो नेहरू जी का कितना बड़ा फॉल्ट था कि उन्होंने उस समय बनने दिया। लेकिन डॉ. अंबेडकर तो एक ही संविधान के पक्ष में थे। तो सवाल ये पैदा होता है क्या चीफ जस्टिस जो कि डॉक्टर अंबेडकर के स्पेशलिस्ट हैं उन्होंने अगर डॉक्टर अंबेडकर के स्टेटमेंट उनकी मनोभावना के अनुसार ये अनुरूप ये कह दिया कि आर्टिकल 370 का अब्रोवेशन जो केंद्र सरकार ने किया है वो डॉक्टर अंबेडकर की भावना के अनुरूप किया है चीफ जस्टिस ऑफ इंडिया कह दे वो भी दलित चीफ जस्टिस ऑफ इंडिया कह दे वो भी एक पब्लिक कार्यक्रम में कहे ये भारत में कैसे बर्दाश्त हो सकता है नतीजा निकला कि भारत में पांच लोगों ने एक चिट्ठी लिखी। वो पांच लोगों के नाम जब आपको पता लगेंगे तो समझ में आएगा कि आखिर ये क्या करना चाहते थे। आखिर इनके मन में क्या चल रहा था। वो पांच लोगों ने चिट्ठी लिखी।हम सब जानते हैं ये चिट्ठी गैंग भारत में चल गया है। हम ये भी जानते हैं कि पीछे अवार्ड वापसी गैंग भी चल गया था। अवार्ड वापसी गैंग को मनाने के लिए भारत सरकार गई नहींथी।

एबर्ट वापसी गैंग के बाद वो चिट्ठी गैंग चल गया है और चिट्ठी गैंग लगातार चिट्ठी लिखकर विश्व को बाहर निकालता है। विश्व को बाहर केवल नहीं निकालता। वो ऐसे समय पर चिट्ठी लिखता है कि कि हो सकता है कि इनकी चिट्ठियों की वजह से पाकिस्तान को लाभ हो जाए और पाकिस्तान इन चिट्ठियों का हवाला देते हुए इंटरनेशनल भूमिका में आ जाए। कौन थे? उस समय फॉर्मर होम यूनियन होम सेक्रेटरी गोपाल पिल्लय फॉर्मर मेजर जनरल अशोक मेहता फॉर्मर एयर वाइस मार्शल कपिल काक जो कश्मीरी हिंदू हैं फॉर्मर मेंबर ऑफ इंटरलोकेटर्स जम्मू कश्मीर राधा कुमार जिनको बीच में ही छोड़ना पड़ा था क्योंकि उनके विषय में एक एक सदस्य अंसारी ने इंटरनेशनल मंच पर कह दिया था कि तुम तो सेपरेटिस्टों से मिली हुई हो या मिले हुए हो या जो भी राधा कुमार फॉर्मर यूनियन सेक्रेटरी इंटरस्ट काउंसिल अमिताभ पांडे ये पांच लोगों ने चीफ जस्टिस को चिट्ठी लिख दी। चीफ जस्टिस को ये तो कह नहीं सकते कि आपने स्टेटमेंट ये क्यों दे दिया लेकिन चीफ जस्टिस को चिट्ठी लिखकर मैटर तो हॉट कर दिया और मैटर हॉट इतना कर दिया कि पाकिस्तान उसका चूंकि यूएस में पाकिस्तान इस समय चेयर कर रहा है। भारत की रोटी खाते हैं। भारत का नमक खाते हैं। और इनकी चिट्ठी का इस्तेमाल वह वहां करें तो फिर जम्मू कश्मीर का इशू उठाने में पाकिस्तान को आसानी हो जाए। इन इन सब की खास बात हमको समझनी चाहिए कि आखिर यह कौन कितने पानी में है और क्यों है। मैं सबसे पहला गोपाल कृष्ण पिल्लई की बात अगर करूं तो ये 2009 से लेकर 2011 तक भारत के होम सेक्रेटरी रहे। केरला के रहने वाले हैं। लेकिन इनका अगर इतिहास देखोगे 2016 में इन्होंने इशरत जहां एनकाउंटर पर सवाल उठा दिए। इशरत जहां एनकाउंटर का मतलब वही जिस पर कुछ लोग बिहार की बेटी बता रहे थे, कुछ भारत की बेटी बता रहे थे, कुछ गलत मार दिया ऐसा बता रहे थे। ये इनमें भी ये भी शामिल थे। ये इंसिस्टेंस ऑन आईएसआई बैक मिलिटेंसी ये 2011 में ये उस पर भी अपना उल्फाशुल्फा कुछ अपना इधर-उधर का मिला कर रहे थे। कुल मिला के आता है कि मोस्ट ये देश के जो जो इस तरह का माहौल जो है आवाज उठाने वाले उनमें ये शामिल है। कंट्रोवर्सियों में रहते हैं। मणिपुर क्राइसिस में इन्होंने कह दिया कि भारतसरकार तो मैती का साथ दे रही है

अशोक मेहता साहब इंडियन आर्मी के हैं। मिलिट्री का जीवन भर का करियर रहा। इनका इनकी खास बात यह है कि यह कारगिल के पॉइंट पर अपने प्रश्न करते हैं। ऑपरेशन पराक्रम पर क्रिटिसाइज करते हैं।ऑपरेशन पराक्रम भारत सरकार ने चलाया उस पर ये बात करते हैं। इनका पुराना इतिहास बड़ा है। खैर इन्होंने चिट्ठी में शामिल हुए। कपिल काक मैं मुझे जहां तक याद है  गिलगिट से आए तमाम बुद्धिजीवियों और कानून के जानकारों ने शिरकत की। इस दौरान सुप्रीम कोर्ट में सीनियर वकील जी के दुबे ने कहा कि कोई भी प्रेसिडेंशियल ऑर्डर तब तक कानून नहीं बन सकता जब तक उसे संसद में पास नहीं कर दिया जाता लेकिन आर्टिकल 35 ए आज तक संसद में पास नहीं हुआ उसके बाद भी कानून की शक्ल में मौजूद है पूरी तरह से गलत है कश्मीरी पंडित अपने को कहते हैंकश्मीरी हिंदू होने के नाते कश्मीर का जम्मू कश्मीर में प्रोग्रेसिव लेजिसलेशन नहीं जा सकता उन्होंने प्रिविलेज की बात कही है वी विल प्रोवाइड जम्मू कश्मीर प्रिविलेज में भारत सरकार अगर यहां पर राइट टू एजुकेशन पास करती है राइट टू इन पास करती है तो राइट टू एजुकेशन राइट टू इन और दुनिया भर के जो कानून भारत में प्रोग्रेसिव लेजिलेशन के रूप में बनते हैं देश के विकास के लिए वो जम्मू कश्मीर में नहीं जा पाते क्योंकि कॉन्स्टिट्यूशन ऑर्डर 1954 उसको मना कर देता है वो कहता है कि जो भी कानून भारत सरकार बनाएगी वो कानून जम्मू कश्मीर में सीधे नहीं जाएंगे ऐसे क्रिटिक्स  यह 1954 का कॉन्स्टिट्यूशन ऑर्डर है जिसमें वो 368 68 में भी यह कहता है कि जो अमेंडमेंट होगा ना संविधान में वो अमेंडमेंट जम्मू कश्मीर पर लागू नहीं होगा। इनके पास सवाल इनके पास जवाब नहीं थे।

 राधा कुमार मेंबर इंटरलोटर लोकेटर्स फॉर जम्मू एंड कश्मीर इंटरलोटर पीछे तो साहब ने 2010-11 में बनाया था। उसमें यह सदस्य थे। इनकी खास बात यह थी कि इंटरनेशनल मंच पर एमएम अंसारी साहब ने एक स्टेटमेंट दे दिया था और एमएम अंसारी के स्टेटमेंट की वजह से एमएम अंसारी ने ऐसा स्टेटमेंट दिया। उन्होंने कहा कि ये मिले हुए हैं मिलिटेंट से या ये सेपरेटिस्टों के साथ मिले हुए हैं। सेपरेटिस्टों के साथ मिले होने का मतलब इन्होंने इनके ऊपर सवाल खड़े किए। बाद में इन्होंने इस्तीफा दे दिया। आर्टिकल 370 के विषय में ये इनको बड़ा दर्द हुआ और इन्होंने जाकर यह भी उसमें शामिल हो गए। उन गैंगों में जो इंटर एंटीनेशनल या बायस मैं कहूं इंटरनेशनल किसको कहूं इनका अपना इंटरप्रिटेशन होगा। बाकी मेरे अपने इंटरप्रिटेशन है। यह तमाम तरह के प्रश्न खड़े होते हैं। अमिताभ पांडे यह यह भी वह व्यक्ति हैं। उसी ग्रुप के व्यक्ति इंडियन एडमिनिस्ट्रेटिव सर्विस के हैं। ये भी उनमें शामिल है। इन पांच लोगों ने चिट्ठी लिखी और चिट्ठी लिखकर चीफ जस्टिस ऑफ इंडिया से कहा कि जिस समय  370 का सुनवाई चल रही थी। कि आर्टिकल 370 की सुनवाई के समय पर हम सब जान रहे हैं कि उस समय ऑनरेबल और संजीव खन्ना साहब ने उस समय चीफ जस्टिस ने कहा था और उस समय सॉलिसिटर जनरल ने कहा था एस सून एस पॉसिबल हम इसका स्टेटहुड मेंटेन करेंगे जल्दी से जल्दी चुनाव करवाएंगे तो चुनाव तो करवा दिए गए हैं लेकिन स्टेटहुड नहीं दिया जा रहा है जम्मू कश्मीर या अनक्स्टिट्यूशन जबकि कॉन्स्टिट्यूशनल बेंच ये कह चुकी है कि कॉन्स्टिट्यूशनली पार्लियामेंट को पावर है।बेंच और उसने निर्णय में कहा हमने वहां सिद्ध किया कोर्ट ने स्वीकार किया और कोर्ट ने ऑर्डर किया लेकिन साहब अनकस्टिट्यूशनल अभी भी बता रहे हैं ये लोग अभी भी बता रहे हैं कि साहब स्टेटहुड का ये वो सवाल खड़े कर रहे हैं।

 एक तो चीफ जस्टिस ने बोला इनका काउंटर और दूसरा कहीं जम्मू एंड कश्मीर विषय वो जो पाकिस्तान उठाना चाहता है इनका लेटर वो ग्राउंड तो नहीं बनेगा ये ग्राउंड बनाकर इंटरनेशनल सिनेरियो में रखना चाहते क्योंकि बड़ी डेजिग्नेटरी भारत की है। भारत के बड़े ओदों पर रहे हैं। इंटरनेशनलमंचों पर इसलिए जाते हैं क्योंकि अच्छे क्रिटिक हैं भारत के। लेकिन क्या इनको भारत अक्षुण रास नहीं आता? यह भी एक सवाल है।

अब उसमें तो सवाल नहीं खड़ा कर सकते। लेकिन इंटेंशन क्या है? इस पर सवाल खड़ा हो सकता है। आप सोच कर देखिए चटगांव बंदरगाह। इधर बांग्लादेश षड्यंत्र कर रहा है। चटगांव बंदरगाह। चरगांव बंदरगाह पर उनकी नेवी ने उसको ले लिया है। फिर वहां रडार सिस्टम से इस समय उसकी गहराई और उसका सब काउंट किया जा रहा है। यह कहा जाता है कि उसकी गहराई में कितने वॉरशिप्स आ सकते हैं। कितने बड़े-बड़े शिप वहां खड़े हो सकते हैं। कितने वॉरशिप वहां से निकल सकते हैं। उसके लिए क्या-क्या जरूरत है? अंदाजा यह है कि बांग्लादेश पाकिस्तान के साथ और चाइना के साथ मुहिम खड़ी करके यह सब कुछ कर रहा है। मोहम्मद यूनुस लगातार कोशिश कर रहे हैं कि वहां पर वॉरशिप्स होते हैं वो चलाए जा सके। बांग्लादेश तो इस स्तर पर तैयारियां कर रहा है। डोनाल्ड ट्रंप मुनीर को बुलाकर मोदी जी को बुलाकर फोटो खिंचाना चाहते थे कि भैया मैंने करवा दिया और इधर मोदी जी क्रिटिसाइज होतेआडवाणी जी बन जाते नए और आडवाणी जी बन जाते तो मोदी जी का रास्ता इधर से कहीं आडवाणी जी की तरह चल जाता। जैसे वो जिना के मजार पर चले गए थे। ऐसे ही मोदी जी अगर डोनाल्ड ट्रंप की पार्टी में चले जाते।मुनीर के साथ डोनाल्ड ट्रंप फोटो खिंचवा लेते। मतलब मोदी जी की दशा यहां खराब हो जाती। सरकार संकट में आ जाती और सरकार संकट में आती तो फिर क्या खेल खेलते कांग्रेसी और इनके साथ मिलकर यह भविष्य है। पाकिस्तान असीम मुनीर के साथ लगातार खेल खेल ही रहा है। असीम मुनीर अपने यहां लोगों के सेमिनार और तमाम तरह की रिसर्चें, स्कॉलरशिप प्रोनाउंस कर रहा है यह सिद्ध करने के लिए कि पाकिस्तान जीता है। कश्मीर कॉज के लिए जो लोग वहां बलिदान कर रहे हैं जो जा रहे हैं हम उनके साथ खड़े हुए हैं उनकी कुर्बानी में व्यर्थ नहीं जाने देंगे और वो टेररिस्ट नहीं है। आप सोचो 29 लोगों को मारने वाले सीधी गोली मारने वाले टेररिस्ट नहीं है। वो कहता है वो कश्मीर कॉज के लिए लड़ रहे हैं।बताने की कोशिश की कि षड्यंत्रों से भरा पड़ा है भारत। षड्यंत्रकारियों से घिरा पड़ा है भारत।

हमें बाहर दुश्मन ढूंढने की आवश्यकता नहीं वो तो दिखता ही है। अंदर भी दुश्मन हैं जिनको ढूंढकर चिन्हित करके इलिमिनेट करने की आवश्यकता है। ये मैंने आपको बताने की कोशिश करी। कितना विषय दुनिया के सामने जा पाएगा। कहां तक जा पाएगा? यह तो भविष्य बताएगा। लेकिन मैं चाहता हूं कि ये घर-घर जाए। लोगों को पता लगे, एनालिटिक्स पता लगे कि आखिर क्या खेल भारत के साथ खेला जा रहा है। 

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme Court & Collegium-National Law University, Kochi Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Supreme ...