|
|
|
|
| Post New Topic |
| judicial Integrity | Views: 222 |
| Oct 21, 2009 2:47 am | | judicial Integrity | # |
charu hasan | |
To
learned Senior Counsel of Supreme Court
Mr. Anil Divan.
New Delhi
Sir,
I had the privilege of reading your article titled “Judicial Integrity” in The Hindu dated 21-10-2009. Let me introduce myself as an one time advocate enrolled in The High Court of Judicature, Bombay before Hon.Justice Chagla, and practiced law for 30 years before the subordinate judiciary and the Madras High Court and deviated to acting in Films which became our family trade with a few actors and directors a lot more famous than this last of the lawyers in our family.
I happened to practice in Madras High Court when Hon. Justice Ramasamy was in the High Court Bench. I have had enough grievances against Hon. Ramasamy J and he also knew me just around the time I moved away from the Bar to films. There was one modus operandi in dispensing with justice in cases posted from the previous day for want of time. His Lordship had the knack of remembering the faces of counsels not immediately present before court and disposing them in limini. Subject to correction I have not heard of any corruption allegations.
Since you know sir, that the reasons for moving the impeachment was his method of finding loopholes in the rules and guidelines of spending for maintenance of Chief Justices residence and refurbishing of silver maces etc which was within law but with little respect for the method of expenditure of public money.
The basic problem is because all constitutional appointments are untouchable under the states’ law or the center. Only an amendment of the constitution by setting up powers in the hands a full bench of the Apex Court alone can save the anomaly in our law that places our Justices at the level of God.
There were many cases where the Supreme Court found itself helpless in dealing with Judges appointed under the constitution. One instance is when a High Court judge stayed the Chief Minister’s discretionary allotments of Housing plots and vacated the stay soon after one plot was allotted to the very judge. The apex court could do nothing more than declaring the allotment in favor of judge illegal set it aside.
Another case was that of a member of parliament stated under oath that he received illegal gratification for voting in the Indian parliament and barring prosecuting people who paid could do nothing for an admitted crime as the jurisdiction for taking action vested with parliament not the court of law.
I have heard a Madras High Court justice mentioning in open court that women who speak about sex and all their friends deserve to be in prison. It is time that people of your stature made due amendment to the constitution to bring the erring judges under the purview of the Full Bench of the Supreme Court.
Yours respectfully
S.Charuhasan
Private Reply to charu hasan |
| Oct 21, 2009 7:12 am | | re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Very interesting charu.
Justice ramasamy escaped impeachement because sedapatti muthaiah abstained from voting and the impeachment motion in parliament was lost by narrow margin.
Juatice veerasami was prosecuted under disproportionate wealth case and it was dragged for 30 years only to be let of at the end.
I have come across cases where bribes were paid to decide the case by the judge favourably.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 21, 2009 12:22 pm | | re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | would you agree to testify?
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 21, 2009 2:57 pm | | re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
Samita Bondal | | that's too much work Soeb, who'd listen anyway.........
Private Reply to Samita Bondal |
| Oct 21, 2009 6:12 pm | | re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | haha!
Soeb you are free to go ahead and defend him in court.
What I am talking about is the reported proceedings on the case in news papers ,so the proof you ask can be obtained in archives of The Hindu.
Charu knows better period!!!!!!!!!!
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 22, 2009 12:07 am | | re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | you will have to charge him first . . . . with substantial grounds for the court to admit the case . . . . then the question of defence may arise if he wishes to be defended . . . . . the cart and the horse must be kept in their proper place dear PR . . . . .
misplaced priorities and logic - that is the bimari (unwellness) that has assumed pandemic proportions . . . .
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 22, 2009 2:50 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | I want to tell you the same,just as you want proof to find a person guilty,so do you have to show proof for not being guilty.
If a persons actions are suspect then he needs to prove that he has done nothing wrong and his actions are genuine and/or he is innocent.
A person under law also needs to prove that he is not guilty as a defendent.
Many times a person is charged with an offence and detained for years in jail pending prosecution.
//misplaced priorities and logic - that is the bimari (unwellness) that has assumed pandemic proportions . . . . //
I feel it is necessary to investigate a person if his actions are suspicious and simply saying there is no proof is avoidence of responsibility by all concerned.
In the cases cited above the cases were investigated and proof were submitted to court.The impeachment motion was moved not on imaginary charges .Since the justice escaped impeachment (defeated)do not assume he is innocent as all the evidence was crystal clear still the politicians (MPs)decided to let him off the hook.
Whatever charu has stated came in THe Hindu many years back and I read this case regularly so I am very well aware of it.
You can defend one and all but the suspicious actions make a person a suspect still.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 22, 2009 3:10 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | the founding principles of natural justice based on which all law is made and justice administered says - a person is deemed innocent until proved otherwise . . . .
therefore it never required to furnish proof of innocence . . . . .
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 22, 2009 3:20 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | i strongly believe in suspecting - not always people and motives though . . . .
that is why i ask hundreds of questions that are looked on with suspicion by those who find them inconvenient and emabarssing . . . .
but i never make accusations without substantial evidence to bear out my suspicion . . . . when i suspect that something is amiss (or being missed) i voice my concerns . . . . when i recieve evasive and angry responses my fears are confirmed and suspicions get stronger . . . . i investigate deeper . . . . then the reactionary behavior sets in . . . . .
i regard this as a malaise and believe that silence is not sufficient . . . . society my treat such disgusting behavior with compassion and empathy and help rehabilitate those who suffer . . . . therefore i continue to pray that those (who wrongly believe that rest of the world is guilty always) must get well soon . . . .
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 22, 2009 3:24 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | All the courts go by evidence supplied and if the evidence is tampered to escape punishment .
So a guilty person is let off for insufficient evidence .He does not crib about character assasination ,eventhough he was arrested ,jailed and let off.
Please note if the needle of suspicion comes then every person has to unergo the process till he proves his innocence by picking holes in the evidence supplied.
In one famous case a high court justice remarked to a suspect "I know you are guilty but I have to let you off because of the faulty presentation by prosecution"
The judge passed strictures on police & prosecution for their culpable action to help the suspect escape prosecution.
Any suspect is investigated thoroughly for many years even if they are let off earlier for insufficient evidence.
Suspicion is based on the behaviour and circumstances which in turn forces the law and order to proceed further on investigation & prosecution.
A person is a suspect till he is proved innocent in court and not by your belief .
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 22, 2009 3:38 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | suspect is not guilty . . . . .
i suspect that you have no faith in the judiciary but you do believe in the judicial system . . . . hope lives . . . . i am pleased . . . .
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 22, 2009 3:54 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | My dear soeb,
How can I not believe in jsutice and fairness?
Our judiciary had lot illustrious ,learned judges but that tribe has become extinct.
My lack of belief in the present judiciary is because the money power is used by many criminals or may be suspects to escape punishment.
I am still hopeful that justice would still be done and I am also pleased to inform you that I would continue to live with that hope & belief.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 22, 2009 9:29 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
charu hasan | | PB and Sf
There are two aspects in every case. One is question of fact. Another is question of law. Let alone PB testifying under oath about a corrupt Lordships. Even his lordship admits in writing that he was corrupt No court can take cogizance of the case under IPC or Prevention of corruption Act. Every constitutional appointment is untouchable by law courts. Only an impeachment moved in the parliament and voted by 2/3rd majority can send His Lordship home. It is not very clear whether he can be prosecuted after passing an impeachment resolution.
Another correction is Hon. Sedapatti Muththiah was not the reason for the failure of Justice Ramasamy's impeachment. 205 members of the ruling party abstained from voting. 540 devided by 3 is 180. hence the resolution failed. The balance votes were less than 2/3
The one member going to the toilet was in the case abolition of PRIVY PURSE that failed to get 50% majority that lead to Supension of the fundamental rights under the constitution and declaration of Emergency.
It is very difficult to convince people that Ambedkar had nothing to do with Indian Penal code. All AIDMK men would swear that CNA wrote the screenpaly and dialogues of the Shivaji's film PARASHAKTHI. The statement that "Tamil is a barbaric language" was by athi shankara and Not E.VE.RA Periyar
Private Reply to charu hasan |
| Oct 24, 2009 11:15 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Charu,
Thanks for the correct details of history.
Another famous case I remember in US is that of OJ simpson who fought the murder charges with a battery of best lawyers and successfully got himself of the hook.
But poetic justice was done when he was nailed for many years on a different case of kidnapping,assault ,threatening with a deadly weapon .The charges were proved and OJ is now cooling his heels in prison.
The maxim that not innocent should not be punished is more useful to a criminal as shadow doubts are created on the evidence or evidence is tampered with to escape the law.
In real life we have come across many murderers who have committed multiple murders but are still around alive escaping punishment for many years and even after serving life sentence they are free.
Charles shobaraj is a classic case and till this date I cannot understand how he escaped death sentence for the number of murders he commited .My blood boils reading the modus operandi of Charles Shobaraj for murdering many innocent people.
The unkindest cut is shobaraj who lead a life worhty of a royalty in Tihar jail and earned green backs by selling his story for making a movie for a fat price.
Harderned criminals know all about human rights violation if they are treated badly ,but how they treat their victims is a different story altogether.
Chota rajan was arrested and recuperating in hospital in a shoot out by D gang managed get away by buying his freedom in Bangkok.
The law & the clever Lawyers are now verily helpful for the criminals to escape punishment.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 24, 2009 11:17 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Charles shobaraj is now in jail in Nepal.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 24, 2009 11:56 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | are you sure that Charles committed those murders? were you a witness? do you have any evidence? will you agree to testify? only if you testify you can claim that at least you tried and failed . . . . only then can you have moral grounds for suspecting the failure of the judicial machinery . . . . till then whatever you say remains heresy . . . . it is taking surprisingly long for you to understand the basics of natural justice . . . . . has your dogma hijacked your sense of fair play? are you a hapless victim of bitterness for the unknown? just as i am a helpless prisoner in a world of disbelief!
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 25, 2009 2:04 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Please give answers to the following ?
Are you willing to fight the case for charles shobaraj and send a subpeona to me to testify?
Are you sure he did not commit these murders?Were you with him all the time to certify him as a innocent saint?
Do you think all the witness/police/investigating agencies were lying,all the evidence submitted was fabricated?The courts were wrong in convicting him and can you say it in court to face the punishment for contempt of court.
Can you fight all the cases for charles shobaraj and prove that he was framed .Please do all these and make him a saint.
If you are entitled to your beliefs or disbelief ,so am I to mine period.
If my logic is kinky so is your belief that agmark convicted criminals are saints.
Crores of tax payers money is spent to conduct investigation and prosecute the criminals and still many get away.
The classic case of wastage of public money is conduction the case of 26/11 attack and the icing on the cake is Ajamal amir kasab smiling all the time in court during trial as if he has done a heroic act in killing sr.police officers/innocent indian citizens.Such a prolonged trial to a agmark terrorist is justice and what about the victims families that are left in deep misery to the last day of their life.
So you want evidence for this also and people who saw the act of kasab on TV when it was put in loop repeatedly by media.
You expect me to advocate ahimasa to terrrorists and criminals .
All beliefs are debatable including what you advocate.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 25, 2009 7:31 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | "Are you willing to fight the case for charles shobaraj and send a subpeona to me to testify?"
i have not accused him and i have not defended him. therefore all subsequent questions asked by you are irrelevant.
i have cited his right to be defended. i have cited that his position may be considered "guilty" after a competent court has passed a verdict. i have expressed that every accused has a right to a trial. if the trial is unsuccessful then the accused is held "not guilty".
sadly your emotions cloud your sense of logic and justice.
sadly many are like you.
gladly numbers do not make the contention right.
PR - will you call me crooked just because another has called me crooked without offering any substantiation?
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 25, 2009 9:03 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Soeb
"sadly your emotions cloud your sense of logic and justice"
I feel it is the same with you ,while you always want proof ,you seem to ignore what proof that is already there.
If my emotions cloud me then why I continue to show respect to your views.If your logic only appeals to you so be it.
Soeb "PR - will you call me crooked just because another has called me crooked without offering any substantiation?
it that way"
I would call you opinionated that is all and I repeat for the millionth time I treat you as my friend so there is no chance of insulting you.
NOw ,my logic is if a predatory animal( bi-ped homosapiens included) attacks you then you have to defend yourself by killing it.
If the bi-ped homosapiens kill their own for their own logic ( like terrorists,fundamentalists ,criminals,serial killers etc,.)then there is nothing wrong in giving death sentence to them.
Soeb "sadly many are like you.
gladly numbers do not make the contention right"
It applys to you also equally and please do not assume that your contention is right and endorsed by all.
Please note Nathuram Godse asked this intriguing question before he was hanged.
Quote "when I take the fatal plunge Gandhiji's ahimsa will be marching behind me and it would also be hanged to death" unquote
I like ahimsa as a principle and have deep respect for the Mahathma for he was a shining example of a person who practiced what he preached .But in todays world of terrorists practising ahimasa with them would lead to our extinction.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
Many a times the accused use so much of money power and legal brains the case gets dragged on for years and by war of attrition the final victory is a pyrrhic one for the plaintiff.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 25, 2009 2:50 pm | | judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | would you perpetuate a system of justice where a chance is given to one who is guilty to escape due to lack of evidence?
or a system where whilst always sentencing the guilty you also run a risk of sometimes punishing the innocent?
yes - the questions represent two extreme positions . . . . maybe unreal situations . . . . realistically if you are to tilt then which way would you tilt?
the issues are real and archtypical positions are not solutions to life's problems . . . . . . unless good and righteous people like you continue to maintain a position the world will surrender to right wing facism and march behind violence and revenge as guiding principles . . . . . justice by a kangaroo court is no substitute for justice delayed or denied . . . .
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 25, 2009 4:15 pm | | re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Soeb,
I do not believe in violence nor do i propose that one should be thirsting for revenge.
As a form of self defence violence also needs to be used selectively.I reiterate ahimsa as a principle would give positive results and but the results are rather slow to come.
Have we not seen the ways & means adopted by hardened criminals & super smart legal brains who make mockery of the legal system /law .
Soeb "yes - the questions represent two extreme positions . . . . maybe unreal situations . . . . realistically if you are to tilt then which way would you tilt? "
I agree with you on the natural law of justice where a innocent should not get punished and it is also true that many a times the needle of suspicion falls on a particular suspect due to circumstantial evidence but a clever lawyer still manages to extricate the charged person.
It is verily a tough call to decide at any given juncture who is guilty under the present frame work of law.
I amm with you on not adopting justice by a kangaroo court which is actually a miscarriage of justice.
Thanks for the debate and I am still hopeful that we can get justice from our judicial system but the rules of law require a pertual system of review & reforms to make it pragmatic.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 25, 2009 10:15 pm | | re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Dear Soeb,
I am sometimes apprehensive that our heated debate may vitiate the prevailing friendly atmosphere,but both of us are matured & friendly enough to live above mundane human emotions.I try hard to practice equanimity & stoicism and the results are amazing when I succeed.
Now let us ask our legal guru charu for his views.
Charu pls come !
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 25, 2009 10:47 pm | | re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | yes ask for views from a guru but before and after obtaining views remember that above all are the principles of natural justice and the will of the people . . . . nature and God (for those who believe) have quaintly conspired to distribute powers this way!
heated debates? i see none. those who see heat feel the heat and try to turn it on too. they end up with intellectual and ideological ulcers and ultimately get consumed by the hatred they try to propagate. sad but true. i pray that they get well soon!
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 26, 2009 9:55 am | | re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
charu hasan | | When I tried to run away from law courts and succeeded only in my second attempt, even after coming to the tinsel world the film makers always fought shy of casting me in lawyer’s role. I might be behaving like a traffic constable in the signal while the film maker of the court scene is in a hurry to drive to the winning post. I also shy away as only cinema has two witness boxes in which the opposing parties arguing against each other, or cross examining one another with the black coated knights of the half-round-table idling like dumb bells or letting out close up expression of appreciating the genius, and the sitting judge picks up a wooden hammer, which I have not seen in my 30 years of legal practice, and keeps banging on his table.
Both of you have travelled far afield of enforceable law, and I have no claims to probe into the propensities of moral law of the land. Under American law you can refuse to answer a question while under oath, on the ground it may incriminate you. Under Indian law, an advocate can refuse to disclose the fact that his client admitted or claimed innocence. I refuse to answer your doubts on two grounds. One is that I have ceased appearing before law courts where one can throw rotten eggs on every litigant and get away with it. He other is actor do not act with out payment and so do lawyers.
As for human decency about your throwing intellectual and literary mud at each others face, I have appeared in some cases against my father who was better lawyer between the two of us and when the arguments extended beyond the flexible limits of the judges patience one of them suggested that we can continue our war of words at home leave him to take up his next case.
Private Reply to charu hasan |
| Oct 26, 2009 10:07 am | | re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | Charu
"I refuse to answer your doubts on two grounds. One is that I have ceased appearing before law courts where one can throw rotten eggs on every litigant and get away with it. He other is actor do not act with out payment and so do lawyers."
Hahah charu we can only pay a bottle of scotch whisky to a retired lawyer who wants to act for payment !!!!!!!!
Are you acting up now?!!!!!!!!!
"Both of you have travelled far afield of enforceable law, and I have no claims to probe into the propensities of moral law of the land."
Whatever small spark of knowledge we showed cannot match a well read lawyers legal acumen,so we wanted a little bit of authentic dope from you.But you are acting up suddenly!!!!!!
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 26, 2009 10:40 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
charu hasan | | People who know very little about rainwater or hydro engineering seem to suggest about connecting all Indian rivers and water conservation and even offer to share the cost by giving a few lakhs of rupees. The teashop politicians want to decide how to make Railway divisions which is matter of administration of Train transport system.
The latest is the satellite viewers’ opinion on how the criminal judiciary should function. People are not bothered about a woman bartender being shot to death by any drunken man. They just forget about a man who gave evidence that he received illegal remuneration from the late Prime Minister of India and meekly accepted that the Apex court had no powers to prosecute the receiver. They were least concerned when he was sentenced for murder of his own secretary during a dispute in sharing the booty. They may even accept him as a minister in the central cabinet. They would even go to the extent of representation to the Governor of a state asking to give him comforts of a VIP to an accused charged with the murder of an administrative officer of a Temple within the precincts of the temple.
They will rejoice in absolute happiness when an actor who makes more money than all those people who work for the media like satellite and press for purchasing a fire arm without license even when pleads guilty having spent years in prison while under trial. Another man who killed a black buck being punished for five years sentence makes the middle class happy not for his guilt but for his popularity and wealth.
The jurists and lawmakers would not listen to the advice of Hon. Maliamat’s recommendation of Judicial reforms but would take to the streets to fight the policemen or take law into their own hands, attempt to murder the accused in the court premises and also hurt the escorting policemen in the process. It is no wonder that their representatives in parliament show little regard to the Hon. Speaker and indulge in unacceptable behavior in the Lok Sabha and invite bad comments from another public servant. The problem is with us people who chose them to represent us except for a handful of noble men.
S.Charuhasan
24-8-2007
Private Reply to charu hasan |
| Oct 26, 2009 12:23 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
padmanabhan ramasubban | | That was pretty good charu!
Thanks.
Private Reply to padmanabhan ramasubban |
| Oct 26, 2009 1:00 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | "The problem is with us people who chose them to represent us except for a handful of noble men."
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 28, 2009 10:04 am | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
Only God Will Judge Me! Secret Guy! S.V.N | | 
Private Reply to Only God Will Judge Me! Secret Guy! S.V.N |
| Oct 28, 2009 1:02 pm | | re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
Samita Bondal | | Charuji, PRji, Soebji,
When it comes to making a choice i think nobility of any kind is one quality thats gone the dodo way. Right now our judgement is limited to choosing a lesser crook.
Private Reply to Samita Bondal |
| Oct 28, 2009 10:30 pm | | judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | et tu, SBji?
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
| Oct 28, 2009 10:47 pm | | re: judicial Integrity | # |
Samita Bondal | | yes soeb.
Private Reply to Samita Bondal |
| Oct 28, 2009 11:40 pm | | re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
sujatha suresh | | .... Wow! conclusions galore....
I just got a mail of nice quotes, and wish to share...."If you go looking for a friend, you're going to find they're very scarce. If you go out to be a friend, you'll find them everywhere."
Have a nice Day!
SS
Private Reply to sujatha suresh |
| Oct 28, 2009 11:58 pm | | re: re: re: judicial Integrity | # |
SOEB FATEHI | | "The only service a friend can really render is to keep up your courage by holding up to you a mirror in which you can see a noble image of yourself." attributed to George Bernard Shaw as quoted in The Little Green Book of Random Thoughts of Soeb Fatehi
Private Reply to SOEB FATEHI |
 |
|
|
