Gujarat HC Advocates Association To Approach SC Against Centre Delaying Appointment Of Justice Kureshi As CJ Of MP HC [Read Resolution]

The Gujarat High Court Advocates Association has resolved to file a writ petition in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India against Centre sleeping over the SC collegium's proposal to make Justice Kureshi the CJ of MP HC.

The Association has also proposed a novel method to protest. Instead of abstaining from work, the association has resolved to request the Acting Chief Justice to hold sitting of all courts for five more minutes beyond the usual working hours. 

The resolution came after Senior Advocate Yatin Oza, the President of the Association, informed the association members that the Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad was not willing to meet a delegation of Gujarat lawyers to discuss the subject. 

The Association had earlier passed a resolution on June 10 deciding to meet the Law Minister on this issue.

Justice Kureshi's proposal was made by the SC collegium on May 10 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of the former CJ of MP HC  Justice S K Seth.

Although another proposal made by the Collegium on the same day - that of Justice D N Patel's appointment as Delhi High Court Chief Justice - was notified by the Centre within two weeks, Justice Kureshi's file has been kept pending. Meanwhile, Centre notified the appointment of Justice Ravi Shanker Jha as the Acting CJ of MP HC on June 7.

Expressing "shock" at this delay, the Association had stated in its June 10 resolution that that the "purposeful holding back clearance of the file of Hon'ble Justice Kureshi is unconstitutional and lacks in bona fide".

Justice Kureshi, a senior judge of Gujarat High Court, was transferred to Bombay High Court last October, amidst protests from the bar. The Gujarat High Court Advocates Association had moved a resolution protesting Justice Kureshi's transfer as motivated by 'extraneous considerations'. Senior Advocate Yatin Oza, the President of the GHCAA, had announced the decision of the bar to resort to indefinite strike over the transfer of Justice Kureshi. This was later withdrawn after CJI Ranjan Gogoi met the representatives of Association.

Controversial judgments by Justice Kureshi

Many bar members share the belief that Justice Kureshi is being sidelined due to the adverse orders passed by him against the ruling dispensation.

In 2010, Justice Kureshi gave custodial remand of Amit Shah to CBI in the Shorabuddin case by setting aside the order passed by a Magistrate which rejected CBI's plea for remand. He also rejected the defence plea for videography of Shah's questioning during the CBI custody.

His 2012 order in the case concerning appointment of Justice R A Mehta as Gujarat LokAyukta had caused huge embarrassment to the Gujarat Government. The Government opposed the Lok Ayukta appointment made by the Governor Kamla Beniwal on ground that it was made without the concurrence of Government. Justice Kureshi held that Governor was acting as an independent statutory authority under the Lok Ayukta Act, and therefore there was no requirement of seeking concurrence of Government. His colleague in the bench, Justice Sonia Gokani, dissented. Due to the split verdict, the matter was referred to a third judge- Justice V M Sahai- who concurred with the view expressed by Justice Kureshi. Taking the matter as a prestige issue, the Gujarat Government appealed before the Supreme Court, but met with no success as the top court upheld the majority judgment of High Court.

In 2016, there was an attempt to cause his recusal from hearing the appeal against the conviction of Maya Kodnani(who was a minster in the Modi government in Gujarat) and few others in the Naroda Patiya massacre case, when a senior lawyer related to Justice Kureshi entered appearance for one of the parties in the last minute and sought his recusal. "When the appearance is made by the senior advocate at late a stage, we wonder would it not have been better if the advocate had recused rather than to request the court to do so", Justice Kureshi stated in the order of recusal. He expressed his anguish at the episode by saying "It is very painful. We will not say anything but it tarnishes the image of the institution and confidence of people… this should not have happened."

In May 2018, a bench headed by him upheld the conviction of 19 Accused persons in the post-Godhra riots in Oad, where 23 people including women and children were burnt alive by a mob in March 2002. These phenomena which we often describe as communal frenzy turn perfectly normal human beings momentarily into murderous monsters leaving nothing but trail of death and destruction for the victims and his own family alike", Justice Kureshi stated in his judgment.

Click here to download Resolution

Read Resolution