With the greatest of respect to the post of Chief Justice of India, it needs to be stated in clear and unambiguous terms. A constitutional office is not a pulpit. A robe is not a licence to dispense invective from the bench.
In one week, the citizens of this country have been told, from the highest court, that unemployed youth are "parasites" and "cockroaches". That those who post online are "anti-social elements". That there are "serious doubts about the genuineness of their law degrees" of lawyers the bench disapproves of. That the country will soon learn "how to deal with the current Chief Justice of India."
This is not new. The same judicial conscience, in 2022, declared that Nupur Sharma's "loose tongue" had "set the entire country on fire", placing on one citizen the moral weight of murders committed by mobs.
Earlier this year, an NCERT Class 8 chapter, which did nothing more than note that corruption exists in the judiciary and described how it is being addressed, invited suo motu contempt, a blanket ban, "heads must roll" pronouncements, and a directive that a Padma Shri scholar and his co-authors be ostracised from every government project. A textbook paragraph, treated as a gunshot. The judiciary, declared to be "bleeding."
Now contrast this with the Justice Yashwant Varma episode. Sacks of currency, allegedly recovered from the residential premises of a sitting High Court judge. No FIR. No investigation in the ordinary course. Sustained efforts by advocates, including Adv. Mathews Nedumpara, knocking at every door, have gone unanswered.
The discomfort I write with is not personal. It is structural. An unelected body of judges selects who wears the robe, through a collegium answerable to no electorate and no merit. The Contempt of Courts Act enables that same robe to silence the courtroom around it. And constitutional convention ensures that no FIR moves against one of their own without internal "consultation." Three locks on the same door, one set of keys.
The post of the Chief Justice of India deserves the respect of every Indian. That is precisely why the occupant of that post owes the nation restraint, not rhetoric. Reasoning, not ridicule. Citizens, whether unemployed, activist, textbook author or lawyer, are not props in a courtroom monologue. They are the sovereign in whose name justice is dispensed.
Fair criticism of judicial conduct is not contempt. It is the price of robes that come without a ballot. Such is the situation that even while posting this, a fleeting thought comes to mind, what if the powers that be, take note of this critical post and decide to crush yet another cockroach who dared to come out.
@advsanjoy @NedumparaJ @mkatju @SauravDassss