Senior advocate Dushyant Dave asserted that the only appropriate step the Chief Justice of India could take is to withdraw judicial work from Justice Shekhar Yadav. He also highlighted Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s warning against interfering with cultural and religious rights, emphasizing that they were part of the agreement reached before Partition.
Senior advocate Dushyant Dave commented on judicial discipline and misconduct in light of the controversial remarks made by Allahabad High Court’s Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav, stating that
“The only thing a good chief justice would do in such situations is to withdraw judicial responsibilities from the judge involved.”
Justice Yadav faced criticism for his remarks targeting Muslims at a Vishwa Hindu Parishad event on December 8, 2024, and has maintained his stance on the comments.
Also Read: Justice Shekhar Yadav Cancels Event On Ram Mandir Movement, Denies Social Media Rumors
Dave was speaking at the first A.G. Noorani Memorial Lecture on “The Constitution of India and the Indian Judiciary” at the India Islamic Cultural Centre.
Noorani, a prominent figure in constitutional law and issues related to Kashmir and Indian Muslims, passed away on August 29, 2024.
In response to a question from senior advocate Shadan Farasat about addressing judicial misconduct,
Dave remarked,
“The only thing that a good chief justice would do is, as was done by Justice (M.N.) Venkatachaliah, is take away the judicial work from the concerned judge. This is something which the chief justice (of India) and the collegium must advise the chief justice of the respective high court to do. There is unfortunately no other way to deal with this situation. Continued criticism of the judge’s conduct is also necessary to emphasize that the constitutional framers never intended for this country to be a Hindu Rashtra; they envisioned secularism.”
He highlighted how the Constitution, through its articles and debates, reflects a commitment to secularism, stating,
“I have not seen even Syama Prasad Mukherjee or Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya in the debates arguing otherwise.”
Referring to the Constituent Assembly debates on religious freedom, Dave recalled Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s warning against interfering with cultural and religious rights, which were part of the agreement made before Partition.
Dave also criticized the “dangerous way of appointment of judges,” which he claimed B.R. Ambedkar specifically sought to avoid.
He stated,
“Ambedkar had said, ‘I think to allow the chief justice practically a veto upon the appointment of judges is really to transfer the authority to the chief justice, which we are not prepared to vest in the President or the government of the day. I therefore think that this is a dangerous proposition.’ This is precisely what the Supreme Court did when they constituted a collegium led by the chief justice to make appointments.”
He expressed sorrow that Ambedkar “believed too much in the citizenry and institutions of India, which led to not prohibiting former judges from taking government positions after retirement“.
Dave noted that Ambedkar assumed the judiciary would mostly resolve conflicts between citizens, not disputes involving the government, thus minimizing the potential for influence.
“Little did he realize that 50-60 years later, the biggest litigant in the country would be the government, with citizens frequently in conflict over the enforcement of their constitutional and fundamental rights… Little did he foresee what kind of executive and judges would emerge 50-70 years later.”
Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court recently come under scrutiny for his controversial comments made during a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) event. He remarked that “India will function according to the wishes of the majority” and referred to certain individuals as “kathmullahs” who are against the nation.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
