'We Can't Go Into Suitability' : Supreme Court Gives Reasons For Dismissing Petitions Challenging Justice Victoria Gowri's Appointment

The Supreme Court on Friday pronounced the reasons for the dismissal of the two petitions filed by advocates from the Madras High Court challenging the appointment of Justice Victoria Gowri as an additional judge of the Madras High Court.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna, while pronouncing the order on Friday, said, "We have passed a short order. We have followed the constitutional bench judgment and said we can't go into the question of suitability". Detailed judgment is yet to be uploaded.

A Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and BR Gavai had earlier dismissed the petitions against the appointment of Gowri as Additional Judge of the Madras High Court on Tuesday. Pointing out to certain articles and statements of Gowri, the petitioners contended that she is unfit to be a judge as her statements amount to hate-speech against minorities.

While hearing the plea, the bench had remarked that it cannot presume that the Collegium was not aware of Gowri's political backgrounds or her controversial statements. The bench had further said that it cannot go into the question of "suitability" at this stage, when the petitioner cited a precedent of the Supreme Court stalling the appointment of a judge on the ground of "eligibility". 

For a full courtroom exchange from Tuesday's hearing, read this Report. Read this report on the high drama that had unfolded in the top court before the hearing started.  

She took oath as an additional judge of the Madras High Court on Tuesday, while the Supreme Court was hearing two petitions challenging her appointment.   

Background

The collegium, comprising Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, and K.M. Joseph, had proposed the names of Gowri and four other lawyers for elevation to the High Court on January 17. The Centre had notified her appointment on February 6. However, this decision has come under the public scanner, with a section of the bar criticising the recommendation as ‘disturbing’ and against the interests of the independence of the judiciary. The protesting advocates highlighted the political affiliations of the nominee, who is, by her own admission, the general secretary of the Bharatiya Janata Party Mahila Morcha. Gowri has also received criticism for what has been described as ‘hate speech’ against religious minorities, particularly Muslims and Christians. “In the context of Ms. Gowri's utterances, can any litigant belonging to the Muslim or Christian community ever hope to get justice in her Court, if she becomes a Judge?” the lawyers had asked, in a letter dated February 2, 2023, to President Draupadi Murmu and the Supreme Court collegium.

Members of the Madras High Court bar, including advocates N.G.R. Prasad, R. Vaigai, S.S. Vasudevan, Anna Mathew, and D. Nagasaila, alleging that Gowri’s ‘regressive views’ are completely ‘antithetical’ to foundational constitutional values and “reflect her deep-rooted religious bigotry making her unfit to be appointed as a High Court judge”, had also urged for the proposal to be recalled. “We write, with a sense of foreboding, in these troubled times, when the judiciary is facing unprecedented and unwarranted criticism from the executive, as we are apprehensive that appointments such as these may pave the way for undermining the independence of the judiciary. It is extremely critical, at this juncture, to safeguard the institution from being weakened by its own administrative action.”

In the same vein, a writ petition was also filed, a day before Gowri was scheduled to take oath as a judge of the Madras High Court, with Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran mentioning the matter before Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud for urgent listing. The chief justice, while disclosing that the collegium has taken cognizance of the complaints against Gowri, agreed to list the matter on Tuesday, on the same day Gowri took oath.

Click Here To Read/Download Order