Supreme Court censures V.K. Singh

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by Ray, Oct 24, 2013.

  1. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Supreme Court censures V.K. Singh

    Former Army Chief V K Singh was on Wednesday rapped by the Supreme Court for allegedly making contemptuous remarks on its order on his age row, saying one cannot be allowed to “scandalise” the court and attribute motive to its verdict.

    At the outset of the hearing, the apex court pulled up the former general for not filing his response on the notice issued by it on a suo motu comtempt proceeding against him and warned his lawyer “not to take the case lightly“.

    A bench of justices R M Lodha and H L Gokhale said that it welcomes any criticism of its judgement but attributing motive to a judgement is not allowed and said that Singh’s statement is “striking at the very root” of the judicial system.

    “You cannot be allowed to scandalise the court like this. It is not permissible,” the bench said and referred to the portion of the alleged contemptuous remarks published in a national daily.

    “The judge has been pressurised. It can’t be said like this,” the bench observed and added that “It (Singh’s statement) is striking at the root of the system“.

    “We welcome criticism of our judgement but we don’t welcome motives attributed to the court judgement,” the bench said.

    The bench also took serious exception when Singh’s counsel sought adjournment as arguing senior counsel Ram Jethmalani was unable to appear as he was held up in another case and even said that the former Army Chief can argue to defend himself.

    “Contemnor will have to explain the position himself. Do not take it casually. You should have told earlier that you did not receive the paper book,” the bench said when Singh’s counsel submitted that entire paper book was not provided to him and sought more to file reply.

    General (retd) Singh, 63, who was present in the second row of the courtroom, remained silent during the 20-minute proceedings.

    The bench finally agreed to adjourn the case for November 20 and directed the ex-general to file his response by November 15.

    It also asked Attorney General G E Vahanvati to file the CD of recorded statement and its transcript within 10 days which would also be supplied to Singh.

    The AG, who was asked to assist the court, said that the matter is very serious and urged the bench to look at draft charges framed by him against Gen (retd) Singh.

    He submitted that he went through the entire recorded statement of Gen (retd) Singh which was supplied by ANI and placed before the bench the transcript prepared by his office.

    Supreme Court censures V.K. Singh - The Hindu
     
  2.  
  3. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    It is wrong to attribute motive to a judgement without irrefutable proof.

    In fact, it is wrong to attribute motive to anything without irrefutable proof.

    That said, since the Judges have stated that they 'welcome criticism of our judgement', then they are equally accountable to the Nation so that the Nation understand the law and the process.

    While it is not a criticism, it is merely confounds.

    Maybe the good judges could explain the following:

    1. that while a rapist is declared a juvenile, based on his school certificate (which can be fudged at will in our country), how is it that a responsible officer like the Chief's school leaving certificate is Invalid. More so, when it is backed with the Birth Certificate issued by an Army Hospital and by the Record Office DO Part II. Both of which cannot be fudged?

    2. What exactly did Judge Lodha mean by while asking the General Singh's counsel whether they wanted to withdraw the court said,"We want to ensure as a Chief of Army Staff you continue to serve the country as you did for 38 years. This verdict should not come in your way. Wise men are those who move with the wind."

    Go with the wind?

    Meaning allow injustice, improprieties to be heaped because it is prudent to do so to save one's bacon and sail smoothly through life?

    In short, be characterless to be pleasant and acceptable?

    Rabindranath Tagore snippet goes - You can be pleasant to the enemy through a lack of character - or words to that effect.

    3. Justice H L Gokhale said in the court: “The government gave you an opportunity. It is not fair to criticize the Defence Ministry. The matter was treated as closed. The government made you Chief of the Army. They could have easily said ‘We don’t need such a person’.”

    They could have easily said ‘We don’t need such a person?

    VK Singh Age Issue | Indian Military News

    Do we live in Alice in Wonderland that the The Red Queen says Off with their heads?!

    And off goes the Heads?

    I am sure the worthy Judge realises that there is rules and the law to dismiss any person and it can't be done perfunctorily.

    And if it is done perfunctorily, then one could always move the Courts.

    But given the worthy Judge opinion, as he has done here, that the Govt can simply dismiss a person on its whims and fancies, then there is no hope left that in this country law will be upheld!

    Maybe the worthy Judges would address these issues so that one knows how the law will protect us.
     
  4. Decklander

    Decklander New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    4,044
    Location:
    New Delhi
    The same SC had stated after the retirement of Justice Kabir that some of the judgements need reexamination. This was stated by new CJI. Now in the case of Gen, why did SC not question the basis on which the GOI took a decision to decide the age of Gen when the existing rules then and even now, stated very clearly that in case of any discripency regarding DOB, 10th class certificate will be held correct.
    Also, SC failed to notice that while Gen agreed to whatever final decision GOI took, that was extricated from him when he came up for promotion and this means coercion and undue pressure. How can SC forget that when a person approaches any court he agrees to respect the decision taken by the court but that does not mean that a court can throw laws to wind and decide a case in contravention of existing rules of the land.
    What MOD & GOI did was precisely this, they threw rule book to dustbin and took a decision which was against the rules laid down by SC of India. Why did SC not ask GOI these questions.
     
  5. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,529
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    What is the legal reference to this case?
     

Share This Page