Before giving up charge, CJ spars in open with judge

Differences among judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court came into the open today when Chief Justice B K Roy ticked off Justice V K Bal...

Differences among judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court came into the open today when Chief Justice B K Roy ticked off Justice V K Bali for not providing detailed reasons while pronouncing a judgment in the case of Dharamvir Singh versus State of Haryana.

The Chief Justice told the open court that he received Bali’s note about his dissent in the case at 11 am today. Citing two Supreme Court cases, he said even 20 years ago, the apex court had expressed its displeasure at dissenting rulings without any accompanying explanation.

He said

that in the absence of a ‘‘reasoned judgment’’ by Bali, the two other judges were in the dark about his views.

Story continues below this ad

Miffed, Justice Bali responded by saying that he could not have given a reasoned judgment considering that he had received the new note appended to the earlier draft only today.

‘‘I would have had to read the new note to prepare a reasoned judgment,’’ he said.

The High Court’s internal spats have been going public ever since 25 judges went on an unprecedented mass leave last April.

Roy, ever since his transfer to the Gauhati High Court, has been quite vocal in his criticism of fellow judges. In interviews to various channels, he has pointed out how even when he changed the roster, he found that certain judges would get cases trasferred to themselves. He said some other judges would keep case files even after cases were taken away from them.

	Singhvi, Bali transferred

			• CHANDIGARH: Punjab and Haryana High Court judges Justice G S Singhvi, Justice V K Bali and Justice V M Jain have been transferred. Justice Singhvi will move to Gujarat High Court, Justice Bali to Rajasthan High Court and Justice Jain to the Shimla High Court. Story continues below this ad

Justice Roy also spoke about contempt law and the controversy surrounding judges’ membership of a club embroiled in a case. ‘‘What interest did I have except to see that no one raises a finger against my colleagues,’’ he said on the club controversy.

‘‘The law as to whether a judge should be a member of a controversial club was laid down by the Supreme Court long time back. I wish my brother judges could have remembered that the law laid down by the Supreme Court in 1977… We too have our code of conduct,’’ he said.

On the issue of judges’s relatives practising before them, Justice Roy said: ‘‘There was a time when a brother could practice in the court of his brother, a son could plead a case in his father’s court and no one would raise any questions’’ but today ‘‘people are beginning to question this practice.’’

Terming the bar as a ‘‘nursery of judges,’’ he said ‘‘even the most clever judges cannot escape its watchful eyes.’’

Story continues below this ad

Incidentally, the Bar has always stood by Justice Roy. Following the strike, it was the Bar that passed a unanimous resolution calling for action against the judges who had taken part in it. Later, when Roy was posted out, more than 2,000 High Court advocates submitted a memorandum to the President, asking him to reconsider the transfer.