Katju stirs up a storm, says key UPA ally forced MMS to protect corrupt judge

Justice Markandey Katju, press council chairman and retired Supreme Court judge, has stirred a hornet’s nest with an expose of how an allegedly corrupt judge in the Madras High Court continued in office despite a collegium recommendation against his confirmation. In an article carried by The Times of India Katju has written about an unnamed Madras high court judge who allegedly had several adverse entries against him recorded by various portfolio judges. When Katju was appointed Chief Justice of the Madras High Court in 2004, he was prompted by the “many reports about his corruption” to request then Chief Justice of India Justice RC Lahoti to ask for a secret Intelligence Bureau inquiry. [caption id=“attachment_687695” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Justice Katju.[/caption] The IB confirmed the reports of corruption, Katju writes and, as the judge’s two-year tearm as additionla judge was coming to an end, a Supreme Court collegium of judges dealing with high court appointments “recommended in view of the adverse IB report” that the judge be discontinued. Six other additional judges appointed along with him were confirmed and made permanent judges. The Supreme Court collegium’s report was sent to the Union government, but there was a fresh twist in the tale – a political party whose support was critical to the then UPA government reportedly blocked the recommendation. In the article that Katju has also posted on his blog and his Facebook page, he writes: “One such ally was the party in Tamil Nadu which was backing this corrupt judge. On coming to know of the recommendation of the three-judge Supreme Court collegium they strongly objected to it. The information I got was that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was at that time leaving for New York to attend the UN general assembly session. At the Delhi airport, he was told by ministers of the Tamil Nadu party that by the time he returned from New York his government would have fallen as their party would withdraw support to the UPA (for not continuing that additional judge).” Eventually, the high court judge in question got a year’s term as additional judge twice, before he was confirmed as a permanent judge and transferred to another high court. Katju has chosen not to name either the judge or the party, though the latter is a no-brainer since the only large and critical Tamil Nadu constituent of the UPA was the DMK. He says his objective in writing the blog post was to “show how the system actually works”. Speaking to CNN-IBN on Monday morning, Katju said the extension of term for the judge was an “improper compromise” and that “there was no justification for giving him another term as additional judge”. He said it didn’t matter so much whether the collegium system is altered. “Whatever system you have, people manning that system should be first class people,” he said. Asked why he was raking up the matter now after almost nine years, he said, “Better late than never… The question is not why I am saying this now but whether what I’m saying is right or wrong… Why are you concerned why I am making a statement now or whether I should have done it before?” Asked if there continues to be political interference in appointment of judges, he said, “Sometimes there is.” Katju appears to be chronicling his stint as Madras High court chief justice – his earlier blog post was titled ‘My Experiences as Chief Justice of Madras High Court’. In that post, he praises AIADMK chief J Jayalalithaa for never interfering in the process of appointing judges. She “never pressurised me to recommend any name for Judgeship, nor did she ever interfere with judicial functions in any manner. Throughout my stay as Chief Justice there was never any problem as she respected the independence of the judiciary,” he writes. He adds that he cannot say the same about “another political party” in Tamil Nadu which attempted to get party members “technically enrolled as lawyers” but who were never even seen in courts appointed as judges. Katju has courted controversy earlier as, for example, in 2012 when he said 90 per cent of Indians are fools. He backed that up with an article contending that the election of Phoolan Devi through caste-based votebanks, Indians’ belief in astrology which is “pure superstition and humbug”, the turning of cricket into a religion and the media hype created around news events were all evidence of the “unpleasant truth” that 90 percent of Indians are fools. He has also contended in the past that Sanjay Dutt should get pardon as he is not a terrorist. This is also not the first time that Katju has commented on the role of a political party or politician. From Mamata Banerjee to Narendra Modi, Katju has held strong views about various leaders. About Narendra Modi, he wrote this in 2013: “It is said by his supporters that Mr Modi had no hand in the killings, and it is also said that he had not been found guilty by any court of law. I do not want to comment on our judiciary, but I certainly do not buy the story that Mr. Modi had no hand in the events of 2002. He was the Chief Minister of Gujarat at the time when horrible events happened on such a large scale. Can it be believed that he had no hand in them? At least I find this impossible to believe.”