Think about a couple of notable examples: Saurabh Kirpal was suggested for appointment as a judge of the Delhi high court in October 2017. At this point, there was no decision taken on his appointment although over three years have passed by. The apparent explanation going around is his sexual orientation. So? Is that a disqualification? The Supreme Court has not said that having a specific sexual orientation is an offense so for what reason would it be a good idea for it to be disqualified? Another explanation doing the rounds is that his partner is foreigner. What of it? Is that a disqualification? General T.N. Raina, Chief of Army Staff had a French wife. Justice Vivian Bose of the Supreme Court had a British mother and a Canadian-American wife.
A second example is that of Justice Muralidhar of the Delhi high court who was presented with a request for transfer out of the Delhi high court close to midnight for passing a humanitarian order during the riots in Delhi in 2020. An offence directing Delhi Police to empower the injured person to go to a close by emergency clinic for life saving treatment. Would you be able to trust it? Considering this direction and an aspect of sorrow over the failure of the police to manage the uproar, the transfer order (however passed prior) must be executed promptly and couldn’t have held up till the following morning or even a couple of days. Traditionally, judges have consistently been given adequate chance to join the new high court on transfer and the whole exercise is completed in a graceful manner, however not in the case of Justice Muralidhar. The way of executing his transfer was not common and disgraceful.
A third model is that of the treatment distributed to Chief Justice Akil Kureshi, a remarkable judge. For what reason would he say he is not being brought to the Supreme Court? I don’t need to reveal to you the appropriate response – you’re adequately keen to know every one of the reasons. Once more, the quietness is deafening.
A fourth example – parting a suggestion. On August 17, 2020 the Supreme Court collegium supported a proposition for the elevation of six advocates as judges of the Delhi high court. Nonetheless, just two of them were designated and a notification was given by the DOJ on February 22, 2021 – that is, following a half year. For what reason did it require a half year to carry out the proposal of the Supreme Court collegium? What happened to rest of the four? Certainly, it is not a state secret, the exposure of which will pull in subversion or more awful, a charge of illegal intimidation.