SIR Row: The controversies linked to the Election Commission of India (ECI)'s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) drive to clean the electoral roll have not only left the political fraternity divided but also the judiciary. From the sitting Supreme Court judge to the former apex court, dignitaries from the judiciary have expressed their mixed opinions on the issue amid political stir across the nation.
The latest entry into the fierce issue is that of former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S Oka, who has backed top court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan's recent remarks on mass disenfranchisement of voters. Backing Justice Bhuyan, he said his remark did not breach judicial propriety, even though the SIR matter is a subject of proceedings before the apex court.
He clarified that a sitting judge should not comment on the merits of a case pending before his own bench or a coordinate bench. Justice Oka said he found no comment on any pending top court matter and no criticism of any order passed in the SIR proceedings. He also asserted that judges are citizens and cannot remain indifferent to national issues.
Any Process Which Disenfranchises Millions Of Indians Intrinsically Arbitrary: Justice Bhuyan
Earlier on October 4, Justice Bhuyan said any process which disenfranchises millions of Indian citizens was intrinsically arbitrary and a negation of the constitutional order. No amount of "whataboutery" can justify it, he said.
Speaking at an event at the NALSAR University of Law here, he said the Indian Constitution does not provide for two classes of citizens -- one class of citizens with voting rights and the other class of citizens without voting rights. Any process which leads to wholesale disenfranchisement of Indian citizens making them citizens without voting rights would be violative of Articles 326 and 14 of the Constitution of India, he said.
Ex-CJI B R Gavai, Former Judges Criticise SC Judge Bhuyan's Remarks
Justice Bhuyan's remark drew sharp reactions from former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and other retired judges. They criticised the much-publicised statement of Justice Bhuyan on disenfranchisement, saying that he should not have made these remarks on the SIR of electoral rolls as the issue is sub judice before the apex court.
The former CJI said, "Judicial propriety would not permit him to make any comment on the matter which is sub judice before the court." Justice Gavai said a sitting judge of the apex court should not make statements on an issue which is pending adjudication before the same court. The view of Gavai was echoed by two retired Delhi High Court judges, S N Dhingra and R S Sodhi. They questioned Bhuyan's remarks.
Retired Judges Defend EC, Back SIR
On Thursday, a group of 42 retired judges defended the Election Commission against the opposition onslaught and backed the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, describing it as a lawful exercise. In an open letter to the "people of India", the former judges of the Supreme Court and former chief justices and judges of various high courts said they hold no brief for any political party but felt compelled to speak as "silence is no longer a neutral choice".
The former judges claimed that India's constitutional bodies are under "sustained attack", with the Election Commission of India at the centre of the assault. "Even the higher judiciary, which we hold in high esteem, and statutory agencies have not been spared," the letter pointed out. They said the attacks were not reasoned criticism but appeared to be a "calculated campaign" driven by vested political interests, with little regard for the potentially devastating consequences of "destabilising the world's largest democracy". The former judges described the attacks on the poll panel and other institutions as a "campaign without evidence".
(With Agencies Inputs)