Former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S. Oka responded to Sanjeev Sanyal’s remark, saying that criticism of the judiciary is acceptable, but one must show proof that court orders have actually hindered development or violated the Constitution, not make sweeping claims.
Former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S. Oka stated that every citizen has the right to offer constructive criticism of the judiciary, but they must also be able to show that court orders have actually hindered development activities or violated the Constitution.
His comments followed a controversial statement by Sanjeev Sanyal, a member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, who described the judiciary as the “single biggest hurdle” to India’s goal of becoming a developed nation.
Indirectly referring to Sanyal, Justice Oka remarked,
“This learned man should have given instances of those judicial orders which, according to him, obstructed and hindered the Viksit Bharat,”
He continued,
“He should have given particulars of those orders. If he had, his criticism would have become constructive criticism, which would be most welcome. Every citizen of India has the right to offer constructive criticism of the judiciary and orders of the judiciary. And at any cost, we must support that right,”
Justice Oka spoke at the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) lecture series on the topic “Clean Air, Climate Justice, and We – Together for a Sustainable Future” on Wednesday.
He emphasized that while criticism of judicial orders is permissible, it must be substantiated by evidence showing that these orders violated the Constitution and hindered development within its framework.
During the Nyaya Nirmaan 2025 conference last month, Sanyal stated,
“We effectively have somewhere between 20-25 years to become Viksit Bharat…but the judicial system in particular, is now, in my view, the single biggest hurdle to becoming Viksit Bharat and growing rapidly.”
Additionally, the PMO official criticized the lengthy vacations in higher courts and expressed discontent with terms like “prayer” and “My Lord” used in legal contexts.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President and Senior Advocate Vikas Singh dismissed Sanyal’s remarks as “irresponsible and made in bad taste,” asserting that such statements reflect a misunderstanding of court operations.
Also Read: Bursting of Firecrackers Not a Religious Right, Says Former Supreme Court Judge Abhay Oka
Singh stated,
“Anybody making a comment on the vacations of the higher court is completely lacking in understanding of how these higher courts function. These vacations are not meant to be a period when you do nothing and waste court time. To understand the concept of vacation in the higher court, you should understand the kind of work that a busy lawyer or a judge does in normal times,”
Additionally, Lawyer Shashi Ranjan Kumar Singh wrote to Attorney General seeking consent to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Sanjeev Sanyal over his remarks on the judiciary. The move cites potential impact on public trust and Sanyal’s role as government advisor.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
