NEW DELHI: Former CJI Ranjan Gogoi on Thursday said the January 12, 2018 press conference by four most senior Supreme Court Judges against then CJI Dipak Misra had the potential to stand out as a precedent for judges going to media to ventilate their grievances but exuded confidence that such an occasion would never arise in future.
Justice Gogoi, who then was the third most senior judge in SC, had addressed press along with Justices J Chelameswar, Madan B Lokur and Kurian Joseph to protest against assigning of important cases to ‘junior judges’ including the one relating to probe into Judge B H Loya’s death, answered a volley of questions about the unprecedented presser without showing any signs of discomfort.
TOI’s question to Justice Gogoi was – “Does that press conference not set a bad precedent? Everytime Judges had a difference of opinion over the manner in which the CJI is functioning on the administrative side, or when the CJI repeatedly ignores their suggestions, they could fall back on the precedent to go for a press conference. What are your thoughts on this?”
Justice Gogoi said, “The press conference was the culmination of a series of non-acceptance of requests made by brother judges to the CJI. At that point of time all the four most senior judges were of the unanimous view that there was no other option but to go to the press. As far as I am concerned, I did not know that it would be a press conference of that magnitude. I thought we will be meeting a few people from the press for an interaction.”
“TOI has a valid point, any difference of opinion between judges and the CJI could lead to a press conference. I hope it does not and I am sure it will not. The reason being, occasions for disagreements of a magnitude which would compel judges to take this course of action will not arise, That was a once and out of turn situation. There are people who believe that was the right step, others who believe it was ill-advised. I think this is a chapter which needs to be closed. I can only hope such a situation does not arise (in future). Here, the judges and the CJI, particularly the CJI, has to take due care of the feelings and suggestions that come from the judges.”
TOI drew Justice Gogoi’s attention to the President’s strong views about the need for reforms in the present mechanism for selection of Judges to the constitutional courts. Justice Gogoi said, “The Collegium system like any other system has its deficiencies. It has its shortcomings. It has to be worked to the best advantage. I would not condemn it. It is capable of being worked in the best interest of the institution if the people manning the system so desire. Like Dr Ambedkar said, a bad constitution becomes good in the hands of good people and a good constitution gives bad results in the hands of bad people.”
“Collegium system – should there be so much difficulty for five people to agree on the best choices (for the Supreme Court)? I don’t blame the five people manning the system for conflicts and bottlenecks. The system has its inbuilt and inherent deficiencies. Because there are two kinds of seniority – All India Seniority and High Court Seniority. Seniority plays a big role in the judge selection system. At times one finds the junior is better than the senior. The senior may be average or may be good. But the junior may be outstanding. These are difficult choices. The system in the best interest may want the junior. The norms working in the system don’t permit that. And that is why perhaps the Collegium system comes for criticism.”
Asked about the difficulties faced by a CJI, he said, “The office of the CJI is very unique. The norms that govern the functions of the office, cannot be entrapped within any set parameters. There is a great amount of discretion and the discretion, as far as I am concerned, is always in the best interest of the institution. The best interest of the institution is not always in the best interest of certain people who are part of the institution. That is the way I functioned. How my successors or predecessors functioned is not for me to comment upon.”
Asked why a CJI and not a SC judge gets targeted by a section of lawyers, Justice Gogoi said, “It is normal. A judge of the SC has only judicial power and no administrative power. Exercise of judicial powers and judicial orders can be talked against and acted against judicially. The CJI is the only authority who has administrative powers. So, being the sole repository of all administrative powers in this vast judicial system of the country, administrative decisions which may adversely impact or affect a section of stakeholders are bound to happen. One cannot please everybody. So, for the administrative decisions, he is open to attack like any other administrator. But, for judicial decisions he would not be open to attack as that would be contempt. For an administrative order, it would not be contempt.”
How a flip of coin decided Justice Gogoi’s career in law
Former CJI Sharad Arvind Bobde, who released Justice Gogoi’s autobiography ‘Justice for the Judge’, threw light on how a crucial turning point in Justice Gogoi’s professional life was decided by the toss of a coin.
When it was decided in the Gogoi family that either Anjan or Ranjan would join the Sainik School at Goalpara, for which both Ranjan and his elder brother were keen, the deadlock was decided by the toss of a coin. Anjan went to the Sainik School, then to National Defence Academy and a career in the Indian Air Force. Anjan retired as an air marshal while serving as the Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief, South Western Air Command. Ranjan went to St Stephens and chose law as a career, which culminated in him becoming the CJI, Justice Bobde said.
His youngest brother Niranjan is a renowned doctor while two sisters – Indira and Nandita – joined Assam Civil Services, the former joining the service after she had become a mother.