LawChakra

Judicial Independence | ‘Judiciary Was So Autonomous That PM Jawaharlal Nehru Made Strong Statements Against It’: Senior Advocate KK Venugopal

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Senior advocate KK Venugopal pointed out that in the early years of Independent India, the judiciary was so independent that Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had strong concerns about its actions. Venugopal’s comments highlight how the judiciary was committed to staying free from political pressure. This tradition still shapes India’s legal system, ensuring a clear separation of powers and protecting the rule of law.

Senior lawyer KK Venugopal remarked on the independence of judges in the early years of independent India, noting that “they were so autonomous that the first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, made very strong statements against them”.

Venugopal, who served as Attorney General of India from July 2017 until September 2022, recalled Nehru asserting that “judges cannot sit as a fourth house of parliament.”

Born in 1931, Venugopal has practiced in nearly every high court in India, except for two or three. He mentioned that Mohan Kumaramangalam launched a harsh criticism of the judiciary for repeatedly striking down land reform laws, suggesting that the judges belonged to an “elitist class.”

He explained that these laws were reinstated through amendments to the Constitution, leading to the creation of Articles 31A, 31B, and 31C.

Venugopal stated,

“And with that, so far as the judges were concerned, they were put in their place by the executive of that time.”

He noted that while Nehru threatened to “pack the court,” this became unnecessary as judges later emerged as significant political figures through public interest litigation.

He observed,

“There was no sphere of human activity in which the judges were not concerned,” leading to unusual judgments where the Supreme Court took on governance roles over the past two decades.

He acknowledged that today, many judges in the Supreme Court are still very independent, delivering balanced judgments, sometimes even against the government.

However, he pointed out,

“There is a small section, which I think is quite favourable to the government,” leading to decisions that deny bail to certain detainees.

He remarked,

“Otherwise, there’s a good section which is wholly independent.”

When asked about the advocates of his legacy, Venugopal named Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman and Justice KV Viswanathan, expressing high expectations for Viswanathan, who he believes will be a future Chief Justice.

He stated,

“I found that in the short period of a few months, Viswanathan was totally independent,”

He also praised his collaboration with Justice BR Gavai, who is also known for his independence.

Judicial independence means that the judiciary, or the system of courts, works freely without any control or pressure from the government, politicians, or other outside influences. It is an important part of democracy and the rule of law. This ensures that judges can make fair decisions based only on the law and facts, without fear of punishment or interference.

Key Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Independence

Separation of Powers:

Judges’ Appointments:

Tenure and Security of Judges:

Salaries and Allowances:

Prohibition on Practice:

Powers of Judicial Review:

Contempt of Court:

Freedom from Arbitrary Transfers:

Independent Conduct of Judicial Functions:

These provisions work together to protect the independence of the judiciary and reinforce its role as a guardian of constitutional values and the rule of law.




Exit mobile version