The public should understand this game of controlling the judiciary
N.K Singh March 29,2025
As soon as a bundle of notes worth crores of rupees was found while extinguishing the fire in the outhouse of the house of Justice Yashwant Verma of Delhi High Court, the government and its supporters started singing their old tune. Some started advocating for giving the power of appointment of judges back to the government, while some well-wishers sitting on constitutional posts at the mercy of the government started cursing the collegium system that has been in place for 32 years and claimed that the judges appointed by the government must have been washed in the Ganga.
The biggest reason behind this new campaign is that the current top judiciary is not under the complete control of the Modi government. Or let’s say that if there is one institution that is becoming an obstacle in Modi’s autocratic state, then it is the top judiciary. If the people sitting at the top of power have the kind of arrogance that Rajkumar had uttered in the movie Mere Huzoor some 60 years ago, “Lucknow mein aisi kon si firdaus hai jane hum nahin jaante”, then the question arises “Which is this institution whose backbone is still intact today?”
The opposition knew very well that the Chairman keeps raising his voice against the SC dominated collegium system in the matter of appointment and transfer of judges not only in the House but also in public meetings. Since the Modi government also wants this right in its hands again, the people sitting at the top of every institution are ready to do everything that makes “Sahib Bahadur” happy.
The top judiciary is a thorn in Modi’s eye. Modi had expressed his intention to have complete control over it (which is possible only when the power of appointment comes in the hands of the government) immediately after becoming the Prime Minister by bringing in a law – National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC). In 2014, the government had a huge majority. The previous UPA-2 government was also troubled by the Supreme Court in the coal scam, spectrum scam, chopper scam, tetra truck scam, Commonwealth Games scam and cash for vote scam. As a result, this Constitution Amendment Bill was not only passed by all the parties but also approved by more than half of all the states of the country.
But the intention behind bringing this law was to give complete penetration of people of a particular ideology in the judiciary. That is why one of its most dangerous provisions was – if any two members of the six-member commission do not agree on any proposed name, then the appointment of such judges will be stopped. That is, the judiciary will not be independent regarding the appointment of judges.
Obviously, the Supreme Court rejected it in 2015, terming it against the independence of the judiciary under the principle of the basic structure of the Constitution. Even in the all-party meeting, the chairman said that the Parliament is supreme and the Supreme Court has no right to cancel the constitutional amendment passed by the Parliament. But the flaw in his argument is that if a party with a huge majority in the Parliament passes an amendment that abolishes the election system, will the court keep watching silently? This is the basic logic behind the principle of the basic structure of the Constitution. Should the basic elements of the independence of the judiciary be changed on the allegation of a judge being corrupt? Then if there are allegations against a corrupt minister, the government should also be changed, if there are such allegations against an IAS, UPSC should be abolished?
Despite repeated SC decisions, bulldozer justice continues openly even today. Has the originator of this concept — the UP government — been affected? The Maharashtra government is still adopting it, did the Rajya Sabha chairman not see a violation of the Constitution in this? There is a famous flaw in logic – highlighting only the facts that support one’s own intention. By the way, the collegium will have to improve the way of appointing judges. Corrupt “me lords” are like a rotten corpse on which vultures will surely hover. If the wall of the judiciary weakens, how will people forget this statement of Jesus Christ “Where there are corpses, vultures will surely come” (Luke 17-13).
