New Delhi:

Harish Salve, senior advocate and the country’s leading constitutional expert, today explained the larger-than-life image of the Supreme Court, indicating that it is executive inaction that led to such a situation. The court, he added, was placed in the spot which it still occupies, but it has to be clearly understood that it is not the “moral guardian” of the country, he added.

“Our Supreme Court has a very misplaced position in society,” Mr Salve told NDTV in an exclusive interview.

“In no country is the Supreme Court such an important institution of governance. Our Supreme Court has been put there and unfortunately preserves that position,” he said.  

“That is why there are at times a lot of public disappointment to judgments. The public does not understand that the Supreme Court does not run the country. The Supreme Court is not the moral guardian of Indians. Let’s be very clear about that,” he added.  

There have been times when the executive has shied away from controversial decisions and left it to the top court, he said. 

As example he cited the situation in December 1992 when kar sevaks had gathered outside Ayodhya’s Babri Masjid, ready to pull it down.

“When the judge called the government and said, ‘What do you plan to do’ the Attorney General said, ‘The forces are there waiting for your Lordship’s orders’,” he said.

“This is a politically controversial decision. Either we have the courage to say ‘Yes, We have to go ahead and finish this’ or we accept that we can’t do this. Those are political decisions to be taken, not hiding behind the skirts of the Supreme Court,” he said.

“The trouble is, if for every difficult decision you hide behind the skirts of the Supreme Court, then you are creating a court larger than life. And then when they come up with decisions which you don’t like, you say they are expanding their territory. Of course, they are expanding their territory. Is it right? No, it’s not right. The judges must resist the temptation to do so. But the fact is you are putting the temptation there,” Mr Salve added.
 

In the wake of the latest allegations made by US short-seller Hindenburg Research, legal expert and Senior Advocate Harish Salve has warned that giving credence to organisations like that will lead to them questioning India’s judiciary one day.

Here Are Five Points On This Big Story:

New Delhi:

Hopes of billion Indians now rests on the shoulders to lawyer Harish Salve who will today represent wrestler Vinesh Phogat in her Paris Olympics disqualification case at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Ms Phogat, a top contender in the 50-kg wrestling category, was disqualified from the Paris Olympics due to a weight issue just hours before the final. The Indian Olympic Association (IOA) has appealed for the Phogat to be given a joint silver medal for her stellar show at the marquee event.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport or CAS is an international body established in 1984 to settle disputes in sport through arbitration.

Harish Salve, former Solicitor General of India and King’s Counsel, has confirmed that he has been engaged by the IOA to represent Phogat in the case.

Salve was the Solicitor General of India from 1999 to 2002. He is considered one of India’s top lawyers, known for his exceptional expertise in constitutional, commercial, and arbitration law.

Here are some of the notable cases Harish Salve’s fought:

• Kulbhushan Jadhav Case (2017): He represented India at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the case of Kulbhushan Jadhav, an Indian national sentenced to death in Pakistan. Salve successfully argued for a stay on Jadhav’s execution.
• Ratan Tata vs Cyrus Mistry (2016): Mr Salve represented Ratan Tata in a legal battle against Cyrus Mistry.
• Vodafone Tax Dispute (2012): Mr Salve represented Vodafone in a high-profile tax dispute, securing a landmark victory for the company.
• 2G Spectrum Scam (2012): Mr Salve appeared for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the 2G spectrum allocation case.
• Sahara Group vs SEBI (2012): The lawyer represented the Sahara Group in a dispute with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI).

Following her disqualification from the Paris Olympics final, Vinesh Phogat announced her retirement from wrestling on Thursday.

In an emotional post on X, Ms Phogat expressed her sense of defeat and gratitude, stating, “Maa kushti (wrestling) won against me, I lost. Forgive me, your dream and my courage have been broken. I don’t have any more strength now. Goodbye Wrestling 2001-2024. I will always be indebted to you all for forgiveness.”

New Delhi:

Lawyer Harish Salve has pointed out those criticising the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) do not fully understand the objective of this law or the context behind why India decided on notifying the CAA.

In an exclusive interview to NDTV on Saturday, Mr Salve explained the CAA is in harmony with constitutional morality and constitutional legality.

The CAA will help minorities from three neighbouring Islamic nations fast-track their Indian citizenship process if they fled due to religious persecution.

“The Home Minister has explained the context of the law, and the context of the law is that there was an Indian subcontinent prior to 1947. Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and what is now known as Bangladesh were very much a part of it. And this was liberal. Of course there were principalities, but India was liberal. My wife comes from Afghanistan. She grew up there in the 60s and 70s. She says it was a very liberal society. Their understanding was first the family, then community, then the religion. Now, things have changed,” Mr Salve told NDTV.

“Things changed in Pakistan which has declared itself an Islamic state. Bangladesh also calls itself an Islamic republic. And we all know Afghanistan’s misfortune with the Taliban,” he said.

“In a situation like this, the Home Minister has said, how the non-Islamic population in these countries has dropped dramatically. So if India says people who are of Indian ethnicity, of the Indian subcontinent, the Zoroastrians, Sikhs, Christians, Hindus… They will get fast-track citizenship since they are not allowed to practice their own religion freely in these Islamic states. A theocratic State by definition has a State religion,” Mr Salve said.

“So, if we fast-track their citizenship, if we say we will fit them into Indian society, I don’t see where the constitutional morality gets affected by this?” the top lawyer told NDTV.

On why India did not include communities like Rohingya as they too are persecuted, Mr Salve said this is where the question of constitutional legality comes in.

Giving an example, he said people pay different rates of taxes depending on their income, but that is not discrimination.

“People below a particular income level are given so many things which are not given to others. An ideal welfare state would give fully free healthcare and education. Would India want to do that someday? Of course, India would. But today you have to be below a particular income level to get them because it’s a question of resources.

“The argument of discrimination is about what if you discriminate between people? This is what we constitutional lawyers call over-classification. That if people of the same class are left out of benefits being given, then you call it discrimination. For this, it becomes very necessary to define a class.

“If you make differential treatment, that must be in a nexus with the object to achieve. What is the class? The class is the minorities in the three neighbouring Islamic states. That is the class. What is the object to achieve? That the minorities in Islamic states are by definition of theocratic States treated differently from the majority or the State religion.

“The object to be achieved is these are minorities of Indian ethnicity, who are discriminated against, and the class is them, therefore we fit them in… It is perfectly constitutionally permissible in my point of view,” Mr Salve explained.

Referring to the Rohingya issue, he said it is possible that even within a theocratic State, people of the State religion are treated differently.

“But can you deny the fact that in a State religion, there is a State religion and there are religions discouraged by the State. These are the classifications. We are not fixing the problems of the Islamic faith. We would be stepping out of line if we were to do that,” Mr Salve told NDTV.

“How would somebody like if Pakistan said certain communities of Hindus are not properly treated in India, that it would give free citizenship and money. We would then say, ‘don’t poke your nose in our affairs’. Islam is a religion. And if Islam is not being properly administered, it is for the people of the Islamic faith to fix it,” he said.

The CAA’s implementation was a major campaign platform for the BJP before the 2019 election. Home Minister Amit Shah has accused West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee – who has long been one of the CAA’s fiercest and most vocal critics – of deliberately misleading the people of her state on this topic.

Harish Salve, one of the country’s top lawyers and former Solicitor General of India, had a private wedding ceremony in London on Sunday. Harish Salve exchanged vows with bride Trina in the presence of close friends.

Industrialist Mukesh Ambani and his wife Nita Ambani flew to London attend the wedding. Other top businessmen, including Sunil Mittal, LN Mittal, SP Lohia, and Gopi Hinduja also attended the reception.

Former IPL chairman Lalit Modi and his girlfriend and model Ujjwala Raut were also photographed at the wedding.

This is the 68-year-old senior lawyer’s third marriage. He divorced his first wife Meenakshi in 2020 and married Caroline Brossard.

Mr Salve has been part of several high-profile cases including the trial of Kulbhushan Jadhav, who was sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court on charges of spying. The Tata Group and Reliance are among his prominent clients.

He served as the Solicitor General of India from November 1999 to November 2002.