Thursday, January 18, 2018


Dear Sri Mada

You are very correct.

The reason our Honble CJI is passing these cases to juniors is because he is allegedly among the most corrupt (numerous allegations of impropriety are against him) and incompetent CJI in many years, second only to his uncle ex-CJI Ranganath Misra.

His fascist and RSS mentality is evident from the infamous "Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham" judgments he authored for compulsory singing of national anthem in movie theatres. Against all norms of judicial convention he sat in appeal in SC in his own judgment of Madhya Pradesh (which is arguably the worst drafted judgment in the history of independent India). Read it here with such high comedy gems as

 "National Anthem is to be sung with magna cum laude and nobody can ostracise the concept of summa cum laude. […] The national anthem is pivotal and centripodal to the basic conception of sovereignty and integrity of India. It is the marrow of nationalism, hypostasis of patriotism, nucleus of national heritage, substratum of culture and epitome of national honour."

interspersed with Misra's hilarious mumblngs in pseudo-pig Latin which would shame even the most stupid first year law student

They have not kept in mind 'vox populi, vox dei'. The producer and the director have allowed the National Anthem of Bharat, the alpha and omega of the country to the backseat.

On a first flush it may look like a magnum opus of patriotism but on a deeper probe and greater scrutiny it is a simulacrum having the semblance but sans real substance. There cannot be like Caesar's thrasonical brags of "veni, vidi, vici." The boy cannot be allowed to make his innocence a parents rodomontrade, at the cost of national honour. In our view it is contrary to national ethos and an anthema to the sanguinity of the national feeling. It is an exposition of ad libitum.

And this is the great eminence who has been elevated to highest position in the Supreme Court of India and will be deciding important things affecting citizens of his country ? No wonder 4 "brave" judges had to come out to "name and shame" Misra for his incompetence and his petty corruptions.

A brazen example of perceived malice in the SC is the recent CJAR matter where a bench of Misra's handpicked junior judges imposed penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs on CJAR, probably as revenge for naming Ranganath Misra as a "definitely corrupt" CJI among 8 ex-CJIs in 2010.

End Quote

"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel said Samuel Johnson. Justice Dipak Misra, the next Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, seems to be one such scoundrel who is making all Indians complicit in his archaic accusation with his decree that the National Anthem be played before every movie."


On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Vishwanath Mada <> wrote:

Hi all

I am surprised by the poor understanding of the high office and responsibilities these judges carry with them. In my layman opinion they have failed every way. They could have met all for a cup of tea and sorted these matter within the walls of the courts like they dis yesterday.

We have separate rule for a soldier who complains of his poor quality food.  We take serious action against a poor man. We have political parties like congress and others supporting these rebellious judges against the CJI to make small political gains. God help this country in the hands of these personalities.

These judges cast doubts on the Junior judges as incompetent to handle sensitive issues.  This is highly irresponsible of them the make in a public platform. This will bring bad name on supreme court and the judgements of these junior judges.  As whole country knows there is no justice for the poor more so in the lower courts and now this will add further doubts in the minds of the common man like me. Cases take years most do not see the day till the persons dies. Judges only waste time on giving dates with out reason. When an order is passed the same is not delivered for few more dates without any care for the time and the petitioners anguish. Rich and builders rule the courts.

My humble request to all to please avoid bring these minor and major problems to public space.

Vishwanath Mada

From: <> on behalf of Anant Trivedi <>
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 9:11 AM
This morning's report in TOI says that over the last decade the very sensitive cases have gone to junior judges. The examples they quote are pre Modi era. You being a lawyer should be aware that most SC and HC judges were 'appointed' by Congress. They chose pliable lawyers and pushed them forward. 

So going by your opening sentance, the basis for your argument appears without sound basis. Political interference cannot be the basis for discomfort amongst these judges , because interference if it exists, is no greater now than before. Most appear leaning towards Congress and Left parties. JC missed CJI position twice, so there could be unhappiness and envy here.   Where was justice for 84 riots, ethnic cleansing of Pandits during UPA? Just two examples. 

'The mutiny between the four brave senior most Judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India was long overdue. This must act as a warning and an alarm to every Indian that our very democracy is in peril.'  

You go on to say under Modi pillars of democracy are crumbling. Yes I agree Judiciary must remain independent and fair to citizens. Its a must for our democracy. But else has changed.  More than 30% criminals as lawmakers - all parties guilty, no change under Modi. Media controlled by business houses and any dissenting media side lined - no change from UPA.  Only noticeable change is the emergence of Hindu fringe groups. But you should be aware that if a community is kept surpresed for centuries and they suddenly see freedom, however msplaced in their belief, then such recations are to be expected. Yes indeed the law is not effective in many regions. But if you look arefully so was the case before. Difference is in the nature of media publcity. If you look at the enforcement agencies, I see no changed. CBI/ CVC remain caged parrots as before.  Police remains inefficient as before albeit I do see some improvements in stats whether this is true or false there is not independent analysis. Minority appeasement was there before and is there now. There is evidence of some relief to majority - but why not? 

Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with the sanctity of other pillars of our democracy severely dented and having gone for a toss, our only hope now remains on the Judiciary.

So what is the real reson for your discomfort? 

Democracy has been increasingly under threat in India fro many years and if anything there are signs of intent to improve this situation. 

On 13 January 2018 at 05:51, Aires Rodrigues <> wrote:

The mutiny between the four brave senior most Judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India was long overdue. This must act as a warning and an alarm to every Indian that our very democracy is in peril.


Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer had said "Even so, the creed of judicial independence is our constitutional 'religion' and, if the executive use Article 222 to imperil this basic tenet, the Court must 'do or die'.


The Constitution of India is very clear on the distinct roles of the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. It envisages a free, fair and independent Judiciary. The highest standards of judicial independence must be ensured by warding off even the faintest trace of governmental influence on the judiciary.


Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, with the sanctity of other pillars of our democracy severely dented and having gone for a toss, our only hope now remains on the Judiciary.


With the BJP wanting to overpower the Judiciary too, there is a very disturbing disquiet over the slippery slope on which judicial values are slithering. The highest standards of judicial independence must be ensured by warding off even the faintest trace of governmental influence on the judiciary, which is the last hope for thecommon man.


Any direct or indirect interference by the politicians in the selection and appointment of Judges is a threat to the very Independence of the Judiciary. If the Judiciary is reduced to a mouth piece of the government, the Courts will lose all relevance and end up also as dens of chicanery and jugglery. The Judiciary should never be manned by persons who are tilted or aligned to any political party. Judges should have the spine to crack on illegalities done by all politicians, regardless of how high positions they hold. It has to be ensured that judicial accountability is maintained at all times with every Judge conforming to the highest standards of uprightness and integrity. If Judges cannot independently balance the scales of Justice, the Temples of Justice become pointless.


Caroline Kennedy had also very rightly said "The bedrock of our democracy is the rule of law and that means we have to have an independent judiciary, judges who can make decisions independent of the political winds that are blowing"


To those very few outdated who have opined that the four Judges should not have gone public,  may we remind them of what Lord Harry Woolf, a former Chief Justice of England had said "Like old clocks, our judicial institutions need to be oiled, wound up and set to true time".

Aires Rodrigues

Advocate High Court

C/G-2, Shopping Complex

Ribandar Retreat,

Ribandar – Goa – 403006

Mobile No: 9822684372

Office Tel  No: (0832) 2444012




You can also reach me on AiresRodrigues


Post: ""
Exit: ""
Quit: ""

Anant Trivedi

Post: ""
Exit: ""
Quit: ""

No comments:

Post a Comment