New Delhi :The crisis that erupted in the Patna High Court post the divesting of the judicial powers of the court’s senior-most judge, Justice Rakesh Kumar, this week, is likely to get resolved “very soon”. The judge, in a judgement on 28 August, accused his brother judges of allegedly protecting corrupt elements, promoting casteism and nepotism and indulging in the misuse of authority. This led to subsequent action by Patna High Court Chief Justice A.P. Sahi, divesting Justice Rakesh Kumar of his judicial powers.
“There will be no outside intervention to resolve the crisis,” a source claimed in the Supreme Court on Saturday. Authoritative sources said that Chief Justice A.P. Sahi and Justice Rakesh Kumar would mutually resolve the crisis “very soon”.
Sources said that Chief Justice Sahi left for New Delhi on Friday afternoon after the court hours in Patna High Court ended at 2.30 pm, while Justice Rakesh Kumar, who has been directed to sit in his chamber, left for the national capital on Saturday morning.
The bench of Chief Justice A.P. Sahi and Justice Anjana Mishra, which was scheduled to hear cases related to pollution, encroachments, transport and communications, did not sit on Saturday in Patna due to the sudden departure of the Chief Justice for the national capital. Principal Secretaries of different departments, who were called to court, were sent back.
Speculation over intervention was going on in the corridors of the Supreme Court and Patna High Court after Justice Rakesh Kumar directed that the 28 August judgement copy should be sent also to the Prime Minister’s Office and the Chief Justice of India.
After the 11-bench judge led by Justice A.P. Sahi divested the powers of Justice Rakesh Kumar on 29 August, the courtroom of Justice Rakesh Kumar was locked, while only his chamber was kept open.
Legal experts who spoke to The Sunday Guardian said that in their view, Justice Kumar acted within his judicial limits as he passed orders in the case under Criminal Miscellaneous 4117/2018.
These experts, including some who are advocates on record and Central government counsel, after going through the judgement given by Justice Rakesh Kumar on 28 August, stated that he had nowhere criticised the Chief Justice, but only talked about reports of a section within the higher judiciary protecting the doubtful elements among the subordinate judiciary while giving examples to support his claims.
“Compared to what happened during the unprecedented press conference by the then four sitting judges of the Supreme Court on 18 January 2018 on the lawns of the Supreme Court complex, in the present case, Justice Rakesh Kumar has not crossed any boundary. He has just asked for a CBI inquiry into allegations of corruption, which is not illegal,” a senior lawyer of the Supreme Court said.
Recalling the January 2018 press conference, the lawyer recalled that the four Supreme Court judges, at the time had attacked the then Chief Justice Dipak Misra vehemently.
“They had declared, ‘Twenty years from now, the nation should not say we sold our souls. We are saying this before the nation as our efforts before the Chief Justice have failed’. The press conference was a virtual revolt against the then CJI by the four judges. The four judges had claimed they had met the Chief Justice of India and raised the issues affecting the institution. They had claimed they were not breaking ranks, but only discharging a debt to the nation. Justice Rakesh Kumar literally followed what his seniors in Supreme Court did as is clear from his judgement where he has commented: ‘I was feeling disturbed, perturbed and very much agitated over reports of the corrupt being protected by a section of judges’,” the lawyer said.
Legal experts have also stated that the judgement of a High Court judge can be “suspended” only by the Supreme Court. A double or full bench of the High Court can quash the judgement of the single bench judge giving sufficient reasons, but cannot suspend it.