Device for 'Cheap Popularity': BCI, SCBA Slam Letter Against Justice Chandrachud

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Bar Association has called the letter “prima facie false."

File photo of Justice DY Chandrachud.

(Photo: Altered by The Quint)

The Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) have issued statements condemning a letter circulated against Supreme Court Justice DY Chandrachud. 

Justice Chandrachud is next in line to become the Chief Justice of India, and is expected to assume the role after CJI UU Lalit retires on 8 November. 

The letter was reportedly released by one Rashid Khan Pathan, shortly after Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju requested the incumbent CJI Lalit to name his successor — a procedure that is applied every time any CJI is close to retirement.

While the BCI has slammed the letter as “nothing but a device to gain cheap popularity,” the SCBA has called it “prima facie false.”

WHAT DOES THE LETTER SAY? 

According to LiveLaw, the letter alleges that Justice Chandrachud passed orders in a case that was somehow linked to the proceedings at the Bombay High Court in which his son had appeared.

The complainant also claims that Justice Chandrachud showed disregard towards settled law while dismissing a plea that had challenged curbs placed upon people who had not taken the COVID-19 vaccine.

HOW DID THE BCI REACT? 

Claiming that the author of the letter has also “defamed the litigants-mass of our country,” the BCI sought penal and disciplinary action against him.

Further, the BCI said:

“The country and the Indian Bar has complete faith in Dr Justice DY Chandrachud. Hon'ble Dr Justice DY Chandrachud is an asset for the world's Judiciary and is known for his knowledge, honestly and integrity."

Pointing out that the country’s judges are not supposed to come forward to defend themselves against such attacks, the BCI stated that the “Bar is here to protect the judiciary” in order to ensure its independent functioning.

In reference to the particular orders cited by the complainant, the BCI said the orders do not show that Justice Chandrachud knew his son had appeared in the matter before the high court, and that the apex court regularly passes orders asking the high court to expedite hearing. 

“Any man of ordinary prudence can understand this simple thing,” the lawyers’ body said.

With regard to the dismissal by Justice Chandrachud of the petitions challenging restrictions upon those who had not availed the COVID vaccines, the BCI added:

“Such orders are passed by the courts in discharge of judicial duties as a judge on merits of the case and such a complaint based such baseless and frivolous allegations is clearly scandalous.”

AND WHAT ABOUT THE SCBA?

Strongly condemning the “vilification” of Justice Chandrachud, the SCBA claimed that it was being done in a bid to “malign his image, while he is being considered for an important assignment of the Chief Justice of India (sic).” 

“The complaint appears to be prima facie false and is deliberately made at the time when he is being considered for such appointment, especially when the facts narrated in the complaint are 11 months old.”

Supreme Court Bar Association

Further, the SCBA alleged that the complainant has made “reckless allegations” against important constitutional functionaries in the past as well.

“The Executive Committee of the Supreme Court Bar Association strongly deprecates such attempt. In our view, this complaint should not be given any credence by any authority and stringent action should be taken against this unscrupulous person."

(With inputs from LiveLaw.)