In a significant development in the Indian judiciary, Justice Bibek Chaudhuri, recently transferred to the Patna High Court from Calcutta, has described the simultaneous transfer of 24 high court judges as a
“beginning of a power shift”
from the executive to the judiciary. This move, he suggests, marks a pivotal change in the balance of power within the Indian legal system.
Justice Chaudhuri, speaking at his farewell ceremony at the Calcutta High Court, reflected on the historical context of judicial transfers. He recalled the Emergency of 1975 when 16 High Court judges were transferred by the executive, contrasting it with the current scenario where the Supreme Court Collegium has transferred 24 judges.
“After almost 48 years, 24 judges have been transferred from one high court to another by the Collegium of the Hon’ble Supreme Court,”
he stated, highlighting this as a shift of power from the hands of the executive to the judiciary.
The judge also referred to a 1983 policy decision by the Indian Government, which mandated that one-third of all High Court judges be from outside the State. He sees the recent transfers as the beginning of the introduction and implementation of this policy. Justice Chaudhuri emphasized the importance of sparing use of Article 222 of the Constitution, which allows for the transfer of judges, including the chief justice, from one high court to another. He expressed concern about the impact of transfers on judicial duties, noting that he would not be able to discharge his duties at Patna for several days due to personal arrangements.
During his tenure at the Calcutta High Court, Justice Chaudhuri disposed of about 6,000 main cases and a similar number of applications. He stated,
“I tried to deliver justice, I tried to give relief to the litigants,”
underscoring his commitment to his judicial responsibilities.
The Supreme Court Collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, proposed Justice Chaudhuri’s transfer for better administration of justice. However, his request for reconsideration of the proposal was refused, and the transfer was reiterated and officially notified.
This series of transfers has sparked discussions about the dynamics of judicial appointments and transfers in India. Critics often view judicial transfers as politically motivated or punitive, especially when reasons are not disclosed. However, these transfers can also be seen as part of promotions, with over 70% of HC judges transferred once going on to become chief justices. The recent transfers, the largest since the Emergency, signify a notable shift in the judicial landscape, reflecting the evolving relationship between the judiciary and the executive in India.