legal issues

No conflict of interest in Dipak Misra assigning medical colleges scam petitions, says Supreme Court

The court described allegations against Misra as ‘scandalous’.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that the administrative function of a Chief Justice in assigning cases to benches does not constitute conflict of interest. The court held that a First Information Report could not be filed against a judge without the Chief Justice being consulted, and if the FIR involved the Chief Justice, the President’s concurrence would be necessary.

These assertions were made by a three-judge bench as it disposed of a petition filed by advocate Kamini Jaiswal, who sought an independent, court-monitored inquiry under a former Chief Justice of India into an alleged medical colleges scam unearthed by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

In an FIR on September 19, the CBI had named former Odisha High Court judge IM Quddusi, claiming that attempts had been made to manipulate Supreme Court proceedings to obtain permissions in favour of a medical college run by a Lucknow-based organisation called the Prasad Education Trust. The court commented on the question of conflict of interest raised by the petitioner, who wanted Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra to neither sit on the bench deciding the matter or take up the task of assigning the matter.

The judgement said:

“This Court has also laid down in Dr. D C Saxena (supra) that it was the duty of the Chief Justice to assign judicial work to brother Judges. By doing so, he did not become a Judge in his own cause. It is contempt to imply that the Chief Justice would assign it to a Bench which would not pass an order adverse to him. It is also contempt to imply that the Judges would be so amenable to comply that the Bench which heard the second writ petition could not have heard it. This Court has laid down these allegations aimed at bringing the administration of justice in disrepute. 

Asserting that there was no conflict of interest in such matters where allegations of manipulation are made, the court said it was the duty of the judge to punish those trying to influence by invoking contempt. On this, the court stated:

“There is no conflict of interest in such a matter. In case Judge is hearing a matter and if he comes to know that any party is unscrupulously trying to influence the decision-making or indulging in malpractices, it is incumbent upon the Judge to take cognizance of such a matter under Contempt of Courts Act and to deal with and punish such person in accordance with law as that is not the conflict of interest but the purpose for which the entire system exists. Such things cannot be ignored and recusal of a Judge cannot be asked on the ground of conflict of interest, it would be the saddest day for the judicial system of this country to ignore such aspects on the unfounded allegations and materials.” 

On the current case, where it was alleged that since the charges in the FIR involve proceedings settled by a bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice AM Khanwilkar, who was part of the three-judge bench that gave the Tuesday order, the judges should not handle the matter, the judgement said an FIR cannot be filed against a judge without consultation with the Chief Justice. If the matter involved the Chief Justice, the President’s concurrence was necessary. The bench, tracing the matter that involved the Lucknow trust, said:

“As is apparent from the aforesaid narration of facts, there was no favourable order granted by this Court in favour of the medical college for the current academic session 2017-18, rather its inspection for considering confirmation of letter of permission for the next year 2018-19 had been ordered. The decision will be in the hands of the MCI. After decision has been rendered on 18.9.2017 by this Court, an FIR has been lodged and it appears that money was yet to be exchanged. The FIR dated 19.9.2017 reflects that Mr. B.P. Yadav, Justice Quddusi, Ms. Bhawana Pandey, and Mr. Sudhir Giri were likely to meet Mr. Biswanath Agarwala for getting favourable order at Delhi shortly; whereas this Court has already decided the mater on 18.9.2017. Thus it is a far fetched and too tenuous to even assume or allege that the matter was pending in this Court for which any bribe was to be delivered to anyone.” 

On the petitioner’s contention that an order passed on Thursday by a two-judge bench led by Justice J Chelameswar, assigning the matter to a Constitution bench consisting of five senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, cannot be set aside by forming a larger bench as Article 142 orders, which are passed using special powers, were binding on other Chief Justice as well, the court said the matter did not involve the said Article at all. “As a matter of fact, there is no question of applicability of Article 144 or 142 in this case,” the court added.

The bench also came down heavily on the petitioner and said the petition was a clear case of “forum hunting” as it sought to get the matter heard by a specific bench led by Justice Chelameswar. This, the court said, amounted to contempt. It has bemoaned the attempts to drag the Chief Justice into the scam and said the petition, which was worded identically as the one moved by lawyer Prashant Bhushan, was scandalous and brought down the image of the court. However, it said it would not institute contempt proceedings against the petitioners.

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

Virat Kohli and Ola come together to improve Delhi's air quality

The onus of curbing air-pollution is on citizens as well

A recent study by The Lancet Journal revealed that outdoor pollution was responsible for 6% of the total disease burden in India in 2016. As a thick smog hangs low over Delhi, leaving its residents gasping for air, the pressure is on the government to implement SOS measures to curb the issue as well as introduce long-term measures to improve the air quality of the state. Other major cities like Mumbai, Pune and Kolkata should also acknowledge the gravitas of the situation.

The urgency of the air-pollution crisis in the country’s capital is being reflected on social media as well. A recent tweet by Virat Kohli, Captain of the Indian Cricket Team, urged his fans to do their bit in helping the city fight pollution. Along with the tweet, Kohli shared a video in which he emphasized that curbing pollution is everyone’s responsibility. Apart from advocating collective effort, Virat Kohli’s tweet also urged people to use buses, metros and Ola share to help reduce the number of vehicles on the road.

In the spirit of sharing the responsibility, ride sharing app Ola responded with the following tweet.

To demonstrate its commitment to fight the problem of vehicular pollution and congestion, Ola is launching #ShareWednesdays : For every ​new user who switches to #OlaShare in Delhi, their ride will be free. The offer by Ola that encourages people to share resources serves as an example of mobility solutions that can reduce the damage done by vehicular pollution. This is the fourth leg of Ola’s year-long campaign, #FarakPadtaHai, to raise awareness for congestion and pollution issues and encourage the uptake of shared mobility.

In 2016, WHO disclosed 10 Indian cities that made it on the list of worlds’ most polluted. The situation necessitates us to draw from experiences and best practices around the world to keep a check on air-pollution. For instance, a system of congestion fees which drivers have to pay when entering central urban areas was introduced in Singapore, Oslo and London and has been effective in reducing vehicular-pollution. The concept of “high occupancy vehicle” or car-pool lane, implemented extensively across the US, functions on the principle of moving more people in fewer cars, thereby reducing congestion. The use of public transport to reduce air-pollution is another widely accepted solution resulting in fewer vehicles on the road. Many communities across the world are embracing a culture of sustainable transportation by investing in bike lanes and maintenance of public transport. Even large corporations are doing their bit to reduce vehicular pollution. For instance, as a participant of the Voluntary Traffic Demand Management project in Beijing, Lenovo encourages its employees to adopt green commuting like biking, carpooling or even working from home. 18 companies in Sao Paulo executed a pilot program aimed at reducing congestion by helping people explore options such as staggering their hours, telecommuting or carpooling. After the pilot, drive-alone rates dropped from 45-51% to 27-35%.

It’s the government’s responsibility to ensure that the growth of a country doesn’t compromise the natural environment that sustains it, however, a substantial amount of responsibility also lies on each citizen to lead an environment-friendly lifestyle. Simple lifestyle changes such as being cautious about usage of electricity, using public transport, or choosing locally sourced food can help reduce your carbon footprint, the collective impact of which is great for the environment.

Ola is committed to reducing the impact of vehicular pollution on the environment by enabling and encouraging shared rides and greener mobility. They have also created flat fare zones across Delhi-NCR on Ola Share to make more environment friendly shared rides also more pocket-friendly. To ensure a larger impact, the company also took up initiatives with City Traffic Police departments, colleges, corporate parks and metro rail stations.

Join the fight against air-pollution by using the hashtag #FarakPadtaHai and download Ola to share your next ride.

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