'Supreme Court Broad Enough...' : SC Rejects PIL For Action Against Law Minister & Vice President Over Comments Against Judiciary
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by Bombay Lawyers Association challenging High Court's order dismissing its PIL against Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar and Law Minister Kiren Rijiju for their remarks in public about the basic structure doctrine evolved by the Top Court and the Collegium system for appointment of Judges. The Apex Court noted, “we...
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by Bombay Lawyers Association challenging High Court's order dismissing its PIL against Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar and Law Minister Kiren Rijiju for their remarks in public about the basic structure doctrine evolved by the Top Court and the Collegium system for appointment of Judges. The Apex Court noted, “we believe that the High Court’s view is correct.”
While dismissing the plea, a Bench comprising Justice SK Kaul and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah recorded in the order that -
“If any authority has made an inappropriate statement, the observations that the Supreme Court is broad enough to deal with the same is the correct view.”
Herein, the Bench was referring to the observation made by the Bombay High Court wherein it said, “The credibility of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India is sky-high. It cannot be eroded or impinged by the statements of individuals”.
The Special Leave Petition stated that the two public functionaries have disqualified themselves to hold the constitutional post by showing "lack of faith" in the Constitution by attacking its institution, i.e., the Supreme Court, and showing scant regard for the law laid down by it.
The Association claimed that the Vice President and the Law Minister had launched a "frontal attack" on the top judicial institution in the most derogatory language, without any recourse available under the constitutional scheme to change the status quo as per law. It argued that the unbecoming behaviour by persons holding constitutional posts is lowering the majesty of the Supreme Court in the eye of public at large and is exciting dissatisfaction, the Association claims adding that they have committed "criminal contempt".
While dismissing the challenge, the Bombay High Court had said that credibility of the Supreme Court of India is "sky-high" and it cannot be eroded or impinged by the statements of individuals. It had also said that "fair criticism" is permissible and that the Vice President and the Law Minister cannot be removed in the manner as suggested by the Association.
[Case Title: Bombay Lawyers Association v. Jagdeep Dhankar And Ors. SLP(C) No. 8969/2023]