SC Collegium Cites IB Report To Overrule Centre's Objections On Elevation Of 4 Advocates As Karnataka HC Judges
The Supreme Court Collegium has referred to the reports of the Intelligence Bureau(IB) to overrule the objections flagged by Department of Justice, Union Ministry of Law and Justice regarding proposal to elevate four advocates as judges of High Court of Karnataka.The Collegium had forwarded the names of nine advocates to the Centre on March 25, 2019. Out of them, the Centre referred back...
The Supreme Court Collegium has referred to the reports of the Intelligence Bureau(IB) to overrule the objections flagged by Department of Justice, Union Ministry of Law and Justice regarding proposal to elevate four advocates as judges of High Court of Karnataka.
The Collegium had forwarded the names of nine advocates to the Centre on March 25, 2019. Out of them, the Centre referred back four names, which are:
- Savanur Vishwajith Shetty,
- Maralur Indrakumar Arun,
- Mohammed Ghouse Shukure Kamal, and
- Engalaguppe Seetharamaiah Indiresh.
Regarding Savanu Vishwajith Shetty, the Department of Justice sent back his name for reconsideration by Collegium with the following observation :
"There is a complaint against Shri Savanur Vishwajith Shetty that he is having nexus with underworld and land mafia which indulged in extortion."
The Collegium noted that the Intelligence Bureau in its report has, inter alia, recorded that he enjoys good personal and professional image and nothing adverse came to notice against his integrity. Besides, all the consultee - Judges found him suitable for elevation. The complaint against him was found to be unverified at all levels. Therefore, the Collegium resolved to reiterate his name.
The name of Maralur Indrakumar Arun was sent back by the Department of Justice to the Collegium for reconsideration with the following observations:
"There is a complaint against Shri Maralur Indrakumar Arun stating that he does not have a clean and transparent professional career and indulges in corrupt practices."
This complaint was also found to be baseless by the Collegium. The Intelligence Bureau in its report has, inter alia, recorded that he enjoys good personal and professional image and nothing adverse came to notice against his integrity. Besides, all the consultee - Judges found him suitable for elevation. The complaint against him was found to be unverified at all levels. Therefore, the Collegium resolved to reiterate his name.
As regards Mohammed Ghouse Shukure Kamal, his name was sent back by the Department of Justice to the Collegium for reconsideration with the following observation:
"Shri Mohammed Ghouse Shukure Kamal has limited practice in the High Court."
The Collegium on reverification noted that his average professional income was Rs.16.89 lakhs. Besides, all the consultee-Judges have found him suitable for elevation. That apart, Intelligence Bureau in its report has, inter alia, recorded that he enjoys good personal and professional image and nothing adverse came to notice against his integrity. In view of above, the Collegium reiterated his name,
As regards Engalaguppe Seetharamaiah Indiresh, his name was sent back by the Department of Justice to the Collegium for reconsideration, inter alia, on the ground that he was one of the parties to disputes in High Court.
The Collegium noted that he had revealed details about the pending litigation in the declaration given as per the Memorandum of Procedure. The IB report endorsed his personal merits and the Collegium found the Government's reasons to be untenable. So, his name was reiterated.
Click here to download resolution
Read Resolution