opinion polls ban

Justice Karnan case: A bigger problem than his conduct is how the court has dealt with the issue

Under what authority did the seven-judge Bench gag the press?

In The Advocate, a documentary film on one of India’s finest constitutional minds KG Kannabiran, he recalls defending Naxalites in the Andhra Pradesh High Court. “Why are you defending these people who do not respect the Constitution, Mr Kannabiran?” the judge asked him.

“What is on trial here is not their respect for the Constitution,” he replied, “but yours.”

The Supreme Court’s proceedings against Justice CS Karnan evoke a similar reaction.

Not many would contest that Justice Karnan did much to make a cruel and embarrassing joke of the judiciary. He was, of course, not the first person to have alleged corruption and unacceptable conduct among members of the judiciary, but he made a virtue of levelling all manner of accusations against his colleagues and abusing judicial power in ways that would have been unimaginable, except they actually happened.

So, this is not about what we may think of Justice Karnan’s conduct. The problem is with how the Supreme Court dealt with the issue, and how they understood the Constitution.

Seven judges sat together to hear the contempt case against Justice Karnan. The rule is that Benches of two or three judges decide cases; larger benches are the exception. If an earlier decision of the court is under challenge and needs to be revisited, that may require a Bench larger than the one that made the original decision. Or, as Article 145(3) states, a Bench of five judges may sit to hear and decide a case that involves “a substantial question of law”. There was, in fact, such a question in this case: when the only way to remove a judge is through impeachment and there is no move to impeach, what is the court to do?

In Justice Karnan’s case, there were only suo motu contempt proceedings, and, as far as anyone can tell, no constitutional question was set out by the court. How did this justify a seven-judge Bench? That too, remember, when the Chief Justice of India has been refusing to have the Aadhaar-related cases heard – despite flagrant violations of its orders by the government that threaten the rights and liberties of this country’s people – because he cannot spare the judges.

So, what explains this extraordinary treatment meted out to Justice Karnan that relies on the law of contempt to bypass constitutional procedure?

In the case of Justice Soumitra Sen, the court had devised an in-house procedure and recommended to the Parliament to impeach him. Why was that not done this time?

Hurried justice

Justice Karnan may have chosen not to appear before the seven-judge Bench or be represented, but the Supreme Court has a system of appointing amicus who disinterestedly helps it unknot the legal complexities involved in a case. This was the first time they were considering convicting a sitting High Court judge for contempt. How could they not have thought it necessary to take the assistance of an amicus?

The court decided to punish the judge with six months imprisonment, the maximum permitted by the law of contempt. Although everyone is entitled to be heard on the matter of their sentencing, the court did not give Justice Karnan that chance. Maybe he would have done something outrageous if given the opportunity, but that does not absolve the court from following the procedure prescribed by law.

On the same day Justice Karnan was sentenced, Vijay Mallya, who has been thumbing his nose at the court, was held to be in contempt. The two judges hearing his case put him on notice, saying, “Though we have found him guilty of having committed contempt of court, we deem it necessary to give him one more opportunity and also hear him on the proposed punishment.”

Justice Karnan’s conviction and sentence was pronounced in a two-page order, which stated that “detailed order [is] to follow”. So, the judge was sent to prison but he would not know why until a date in the future. The Bench did not state under what authority they ordered that he “shall not perform any…judicial functions”. Why was there such a hurry to punish Justice Karnan? Why could it not wait until the court was ready with the reasons?

Further, where did the judges find the authority to impose a gag order on the press? The public interest in the utterances of a public office-holder is surely a matter for the press to decide. Again, there is no explanation why the press was being ordered into silence, nor a setting out of the principles on which such an order is based.

Seven judges of the Supreme Court have arrived at what is the first and the final determination of a case in which they have institutional interest. There is nowhere to appeal against this order. Justice Karnan is left without recourse. So is the press, which, without being heard, must partake in his punishment.

If so much power rests in one court to punish and gag, and it were to be used by a judge such as Justice Karnan to issue orders that cannot be appealed, consider the implications. After all, Justice Karnan did get appointed as a High Court judge, so who is to say how much higher in the hierarchy he may have risen. (While on this subject, may we ask how his appointment was made in the first place?)

Extraordinary situations demand extraordinary care and respect for the Constitution, and for law and procedure, especially when the liberty and the rights of people are at stake. This case, unfortunately, is a classic illustration of the axiom that “hard cases make bad law”.

Usha Ramanathan is a legal researcher who works on the jurisprudence of law, poverty and rights.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Not just for experts: How videography is poised for a disruption

Digital solutions are making sure it’s easier than ever to express your creativity in moving images.

Where was the last time you saw art? Chances are on a screen, either on your phone or your computer. Stunning photography and intricate doodles are a frequent occurrence in the social feeds of many. That’s the defining feature of art in the 21st century - it fits in your pocket, pretty much everyone’s pocket. It is no more dictated by just a few elite players - renowned artists, museum curators, art critics, art fair promoters and powerful gallery owners. The digital age is spawning creators who choose to be defined by their creativity more than their skills. The negligible incubation time of digital art has enabled experimentation at staggering levels. Just a few minutes of browsing on the online art community, DeviantArt, is enough to gauge the scope of what digital art can achieve.

Sure enough, in the 21st century, entire creative industries are getting democratised like never before. Take photography, for example. Digital photography enabled everyone to capture a memory, and then convert it into personalised artwork with a plethora of editing options. Apps like Instagram reduced the learning curve even further with its set of filters that could lend character to even unremarkable snaps. Prisma further helped to make photos look like paintings, shaving off several more steps in the editing process. Now, yet another industry is showing similar signs of disruption – videography.

Once burdened by unreliable film, bulky cameras and prohibitive production costs, videography is now accessible to anyone with a smartphone and a decent Internet bandwidth. A lay person casually using social media today has so many video types and platforms to choose from - looping Vine videos, staccato Musical.lys, GIFs, Instagram stories, YouTube channels and many more. Videos are indeed fast emerging as the next front of expression online, and so are the digital solutions to support video creation.

One such example is Vizmato, an app which enables anyone with a smartphone to create professional-looking videos minus the learning curve required to master heavy, desktop software. It makes it easy to shoot 720p or 1080p HD videos with a choice of more than 40 visual effects. This fuss- free app is essentially like three apps built into one - a camcorder with live effects, a feature-rich video editor and a video sharing platform.

With Vizmato, the creative process starts at the shooting stage itself as it enables live application of themes and effects. Choose from hip hop, noir, haunted, vintage and many more.

The variety of filters available on Vizmato
The variety of filters available on Vizmato

Or you can simply choose to unleash your creativity at the editing stage; the possibilities are endless. Vizmato simplifies the core editing process by making it easier to apply cuts and join and reverse clips so your video can flow exactly the way you envisioned. Once the video is edited, you can use a variety of interesting effects to give your video that extra edge.

The RGB split, Inset and Fluidic effects.
The RGB split, Inset and Fluidic effects.

You can even choose music and sound effects to go with your clip; there’s nothing like applause at the right moment, or a laugh track at the crack of the worst joke.

Or just annotated GIFs customised for each moment.

Vizmato is the latest offering from Global Delight, which builds cross-platform audio, video and photography applications. It is the Indian developer that created award-winning iPhone apps such as Camera Plus, Camera Plus Pro and the Boom series. Vizmato is an upgrade of its hugely popular app Game Your Video, one of the winners of the Macworld Best of Show 2012. The overhauled Vizmato, in essence, brings the Instagram functionality to videos. With instant themes, filters and effects at your disposal, you can feel like the director of a sci-fi film, horror movie or a romance drama, all within a single video clip. It even provides an in-built video-sharing platform, Popular, to which you can upload your creations and gain visibility and feedback.


So, whether you’re into making the most interesting Vines or shooting your take on Ed Sheeran’s ‘Shape of You’, experience for yourself how Vizmato has made video creation addictively simple. Android users can download the app here and iOS users will have their version in January.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Vizmato and not by the Scroll editorial team.