New Delhi:

SCBA president and senior advocate Kapil Sibal on Friday said that outgoing Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud allowed people to criticise judges and transformed the judicial landscape by allowing online access to court proceedings and addressing complexities that previous chief justices had not tackled.

Mr Sibal was speaking at the farewell function organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) where he said that Justice Chandrachud expanded equality and that he will be remembered for his judgements, manner, simplicity, affability, and patience, “all attributes of one of the greatest judges of this country”.

He said that Chief Justice Chandrachud had to match up to the quality and the achievement of his father, who was a Chief Justice of India for seven years and 14 days, and claimed that he “truly outpaced” him.

“You’ve given access to millions of people to watch how judges are doing, how they are delivering justice. One day there’s going to be a forensic audit. You allowed people to criticise you. What can be braver than that… You’ve been a pioneer, a torchbearer and a ground-breaking innovator… You’ll be remembered for being one of the patient judges,” he said.

He said that Chief Justice Chandrachud’s tenure was “deeply rich, generative, bringing with it the development of a vast landscape of the law, thereby impacting the future course of the justice delivery system.” “Through your judgments, you demonstrated a willingness to chart unknown waters and to reflect that this Chandrachud has perhaps exceeded the legacy of his father, who was the longest-standing CJI of India,” Mr Sibal said.

He said that Justice Chandrachud will be remembered on the yardstick of how often he has moved towards perfection, to defend life and liberty, and to serve the cause of equality.

“Ultimately the legacy of any judge is measured as to how he has sought to safeguard the citizen’s right, and in that regard, it is beyond any doubt that Chief Justice Chandrachud has rendered some phenomenal judgments,” he said.

He noted that in the privacy judgment, Justice Chandrachud tried to grapple with the complexities of today, which are far greater than those of the past.

“Now how do you build a society when the march of technology is so oppressive that it will destroy the very dignity of the individual and the independence of a human being? “These are the challenges we are going to meet, and to the extent to those challenges, you have already tried to grapple with in the judgements you’ve delivered, take for example the privacy judgment,” he said.

Mr Sibal said that Chief Justice Chandrachud was willing to deal with complex issues.

“I dare say that the past CJIs would not allow themselves to deal with those decisions for years — whether it was Article 370 judgment or same-sex marriage judgment or electoral bonds, or any of those very large issues that actually changed the contours of our being.

“You were willing to take it forward. You were willing to address, and you addressed them with great clarity. We must thank you for all that you have done, and salute you for the fact that were willing, ready to deal with those complexities,” Mr Sibal added.

Chief Justice Chandrachud expanded equality by embracing diversity, Mr Sibal said, adding, “You’re a trailblazer in this regard, for the kind of protection you granted to disability rights. You were a staunch votary of nothing about us is without us.”

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court Bar Association, led by senior lawyer and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal, has questioned the “radical changes” at the Supreme Court, including its new emblem and the statue of Lady Justice, and said the lawyers’ body was not consulted about them.

The bar association’s resolution said a museum has now been proposed at a location where they had demanded a cafe for lawyers. They have expressed concern that work on the museum has started despite their objection and opposed this move.

“It is observed by the Executive Committee of Supreme Court Bar Association that recently some radical changes have been brought in by the Supreme Court unilaterally like change of its emblem, change in the statue of Lady Justice without consultation with the Bar. We are equal stakeholders in the administration of justice but these changes when proposed, were never brought to our attention. We are totally clueless on the rationale behind these changes,” the resolution says.

“Now a museum has apparently been proposed in the erstwhile Judges Library whereas we had demanded a Library, Cafe cum Lounge for the members of the Bar as the present cafeteria is inadequate to cater to the needs of the members of the Bar. We are concerned that despite our objection raised against the proposed Museum in the erstwhile Judges library, work has started for the museum,” says the resolution, signed by Mr Sibal and other office-bearers of the lawyers’ body.

“We unanimously oppose the proposed museum in the High Security Zone and press our demand for a Library and a Cafe cum Lounge for our members instead,” it adds.

In the new Lady Justice statue in the Supreme Court, the blindfold has come off and a copy of the Constitution has replaced the sword in her left hand. The blindfold’s removal is aimed at sending a message that the law in the country is not blind, while the sword was replaced because it is a symbol of violence.

The Lady Justice statue, found at courts across the world, carries scales symbolising balance, has a blindfold symbolising impartiality and holds a sword suggesting that justice is swift and final. Several countries have made changes to this statue over time.

According to sources associated with Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud’s office, he believes that India should move on from the British legacy and that law is never blind, but sees everyone equally.

“Therefore, the Chief Justice said that the form of the Lady of Justice should be changed. He said the statue should have the Constitution in one hand and not a sword, so that a message goes out to the country that she dispenses justice according to the Constitution. The sword is a symbol of violence but courts deliver justice according to constitutional laws,” a source said.

The scales in the right hand, the source said, have been retained because they represent balance in society and symbolise courts weighing arguments from both sides before delivering a verdict.

The top court also has a new emblem and flag. The blue flag displays the Ashoka Chakra, the Supreme Court building and the Constitution. It has the Sanskrit verse ‘Yato Dharmastato Jai’ — meaning ‘Where there is Dharma, there is victory’ — written on it.

New Delhi:

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal today said his women colleagues were receiving threats for representing the West Bengal government in the Kolkata rape-murder case and urged the Supreme Court not to live-stream proceedings in the sensitive matter. The Chief Justice, however, said live-streaming of hearings is in the public interest and assured Mr Sibal that it would intervene if lawyers received threats.

“I have great concerns at what is happening… when a matter is live-streamed like this which has emotive implications… we are not here for the accused, we appear for the state and as soon as the court is making a comment, our reputation is getting destroyed overnight,” Mr Sibal told the bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra.

“We will not stop the live-streaming, it is in the public interest, it’s an open court,” the Chief Justice responded.

Mr Sibal pressed the matter. “There are threats to women in my chamber and then there are posts about me laughing. When did I laugh? it is being said that acid will be thrown at them and they (will be) raped. People on the ground are saying this.”

The Chief Justice replied, “Is there a threat to any woman? woman or man appearing in the matter. We will take care of that.”

The court noted that photographs of the 31-year-old doctor, who was raped and murdered in Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, continue to be circulated on social media. The law does not allow this, it said. The bench passed an order to address this and directed Wikipedia to remove information about the victim’s identity.

New Delhi:

Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud today chaired a Lok Adalat and shared the bench with senior Supreme Court Advocate Kapil Sibal, a rare occasion at the court.

The Chief Justice and Mr Sibal were part of the Lok Adalat along with Justice JB Pardiwala, Justice Manoj Mishra and Supreme Court Advocate On Record Association President, Vipin Nair. The cases are heard between July 29 and August 2 and are heard from 2 pm after the court’s work.

Referring to a case that came to one of the Lok Adalats, the Chief Justice today said, “I remember a case in which the husband had filed divorce proceedings in Patiala House Court and his wife had filed maintenance proceedings and filed for the custody of the children. Both of them came together in the pre-Lok Adalat sitting and both decided that they would live together. So when both of them came before the Lok Adalat court, I asked them, and they said that they had decided to live together happily. The wife said that I do not want maintenance because we are living together very happily.”

The Chief Justice said the idea of Lok Adalat is to settle small cases. “People do not realize how many small cases come to the Supreme Court. We choose cases like service, labour disputes, land acquisition, and motor accident claim cases to hear in the Lok Adalat.”

“The presence of bar members as part of the Lok Adalat panel along with judges has given the right message to the entire society that we are united in our efforts to do justice, especially to the citizens involved in these small cases,” Chief Justice Chandrachud said. The Chief Justice hopes that Lok Adalat becomes institutionalised in the Supreme Court in the future. 

Speaking to NDTV, Mr Sibal said, “For the first time, I was not on the side of the bar but on the side of the bench. It is a matter of luck that he got a chance to share the bench with judges like this.”

Mr Sibal said when the Supreme Court started live streaming, he was the first to initiate the debate in the Maharashtra case. The move of setting up Lok Adalat is a great step by the Supreme Court, he added.

In courtroom number two, Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice K V Vishwanathan were accompanied by SCBA Vice President Rachna Shrivastava and SCORA Vice President Amit Sharma.

SCBA General Secretary Vikrant Yadav and SCORA Secretary Nikhil Jain sat in Courtroom 3 with Justice BR Gavai and Justice MM Sundresh. In Courtroom 4, Justice Suryakant and Justice Ujjal Bhuiyan were seen sharing the bench with senior advocate VV Giri and advocate K Parameshwar for the proceedings of the Lok Adalat with Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice PS Narasimha in Courtroom 5.

Senior advocate PS Patwalia and advocate Shadan Farasat sat on the bench in courtroom 6, Justice Abhay S Oak and Justice Dipankar Dutta were accompanied by senior advocate Huzaifa Ahmadi

In courtroom 7, Justice Vikram Nath and Justice PB Varale were accompanied by senior advocate Madhavi Divan and advocate Balaji Srinivasan were also part of the bench

SCORA secretary Nikhil Jain said this is a historic step taken by Chief Justice Chandrachud which will greatly benefit the common people.

New Delhi:

The Centre on Monday told the Supreme Court that around Rs 3,400 crore has been released to the Karnataka government for drought management in the state.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a plea filed by the Karnataka government seeking a direction to the Centre to release financial assistance from the National Disaster Response Fund (NDRF) to the state for drought management.

“Some amount has already been released,” the bench asked Attorney General R Venkataramani, who was appearing for the Centre.

The top law officer said around Rs 3,400 crore has been released.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Karnataka, said Rs 3,450 crore has been released but the state’s request was for assistance of Rs 18,000 crore.

He said an inspection was done by a inter-ministerial team which sent a report to a sub-committee. Referring to a chart annexed in the state’s petition, he said it relates to the claims made in accordance with the policy of the Centre.

Kapil Sibal said the amount sought for gratuitous relief to families whose livelihood is seriously affected due to drought was Rs 12,577 crore.

“The problem is, according to us, this particular claim has not even been addressed and this is part of the policy of the Government of India under the National Disaster Management Act,” Kapil Sibal said.

“We are grateful for the amount which has been given. There is no issue on that,” he said.

Kapil Sibal said there was an inter-ministerial team which went to the state and looked at all these factors and gave a report to the sub-committee, which in turn then send it to the appropriate authority to take a decision.

“That inter-ministerial report is not with us,” he said, adding, “So my request to your lordships is that ask them to place that report before your lordships and in accordance with that, whatever is decided, we have no problem”.

R Venkataramani said whatever the inter-ministerial team recommended, the sub-committee took that into account.

When the bench asked about the recommendations, the top law officer said, “I wish to say the recommendations have been acted upon”.

The bench asked him to place the recommendation of the inter-ministerial team.

“I will place a note,” he said.

The bench posted the matter for hearing on April 6.

On April 22, the Centre had told the top court that the Election Commission had given clearance to it to deal with the issue raised by Karnataka regarding financial assistance for drought management.

“This should all be done amicably…we are having a federal structure,” the bench had observed.

The petition has sought to declare that the Centre’s action in not releasing the financial assistance for drought arrangement as per the NDRF is “ex-facie violative” of the fundamental rights of the people of the state guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

It said the state is reeling under “severe drought”, affecting the lives of its people and for the Kharif 2023 season, which starts in June and ends in September, a total of 223 out of 236 taluks are declared as drought-affected.

The plea said 196 taluks are categorised as severely affected and the remaining 27 as moderately affected.

“Cumulatively for kharif 2023 season, the agriculture and horticulture crop loss have been reported in more than 48 lakh hectares with the estimated loss (cost of cultivation) of Rs 35,162 crore,” the plea, filed through advocate D L Chidananda, said.

It said the assistance sought from the Centre under the NDRF is Rs 18,171.44 crore.

It said the state is constrained to move the Supreme Court against the “arbitrary actions” of the Centre in denying the financial assistance for drought management to Karnataka under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and the manual for drought management updated in 2020.

“Further, the impugned action of the Central Government is violative of statutory scheme of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the manual for drought management and the guidelines on constitution and administration of the State Disaster Response Fund and National Disaster Response Fund,” the plea said.

It said under the manual for drought management, the Centre is required to take a final decision on the assistance to the state from the NDRF within a month of the receipt of the inter-ministerial central team (IMCT).

“Despite the IMCT report, which visited various drought affected districts from October 4 to 9, 2023 and made a comprehensive assessment of drought situation in the state and consideration of the said report by the sub-committee of the National Executive Committee constituted under section 9 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, Centre has not taken a final decision on the assistance to the state from the NDRF even after a lapse of almost six months from the date of the said report,” the plea said. 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)