2 hrs ago
Former CJI Gavai Criticises Justice Bhuyan’s SIR Remarks
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan spoke about changes to India’s voter lists at a university event.
He said a process that takes voting rights away from millions would be unfair and against the Constitution.
Former Chief Justice B R Gavai disagreed with Bhuyan speaking publicly because the issue is being considered by the Supreme Court.
Two retired judges also criticised the remarks.
One said Bhuyan did not have all the facts.
Another said voting rights depend on what the law says.
He argued that officials should follow the legal steps when changing voter lists.
The court has not yet decided the challenges mentioned in the reports.
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan called the electoral-roll revision arbitrary if it disenfranchises millions of citizens.
Former Chief Justice of India B R Gavai said judicial propriety bars a sitting judge from commenting on a matter pending in court.
Retired Delhi High Court judges S N Dhingra and R S Sodhi also criticised Bhuyan’s remarks.
Sodhi argued that voting eligibility depends on statutory requirements and that electoral-roll changes should follow the prescribed legal process.
Challenges to the SIR exercise and a law changing the Election Commissioners’ selection panel are pending before the Supreme Court.
- Who
- Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, former CJI B R Gavai, and retired Delhi High Court judges S N Dhingra and R S Sodhi.
- What
- Former judges criticised Bhuyan’s comments on the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, raising questions about judicial propriety and voting eligibility.
- Where
- At NALSAR University of Law; the related legal challenges are before the Supreme Court of India.
- When
- Bhuyan made the remarks on Sunday; the articles do not specify the date.
- Why
- The SIR issue is pending before the Supreme Court, and the former judges argued that a sitting judge should not comment publicly on it.
Defence of Bhuyan’s remarks
Criticism of Bhuyan’s remarks
Whether a sitting judge should comment publicly
Defence of Bhuyan’s remarks
Bhuyan described a process that disenfranchises millions as arbitrary and contrary to the constitutional order.
Criticism of Bhuyan’s remarks
Gavai, Dhingra and Sodhi said a sitting judge should avoid public comments on an issue pending before the Supreme Court.
How to assess electoral-roll changes
Defence of Bhuyan’s remarks
Bhuyan framed the issue around citizens’ voting rights and rejected the idea of separate classes of citizens with and without those rights.
Criticism of Bhuyan’s remarks
Sodhi said voting eligibility is set by statute and that any deletion or re-inclusion should follow the prescribed legal process.
Key facts
- Issue
- Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls
- Bhuyan’s position
- He said a process that disenfranchises millions is intrinsically arbitrary and contrary to the constitutional order.
- Gavai’s response
- He said judicial propriety does not permit comments on a matter sub judice.
- Other critics
- Retired Delhi High Court judges S N Dhingra and R S Sodhi
- Dhingra’s concern
- He said Bhuyan’s remarks exceeded the limits for a sitting top court judge and that Bhuyan did not know the full facts.
- Sodhi’s argument
- He said voting eligibility is governed by statute and electoral-roll changes should follow the legal process.
- Pending cases
- Challenges to the SIR and to a law concerning the Election Commissioners’ selection panel are pending before the Supreme Court.
- Event
- The 19th Justice Bodh Raj Sawhney Memorial Moot Court Competition at NALSAR University of Law
Quotes
Ujjal Bhuyan
Supreme Court judge and former NALSAR Chancellor
“Whether you have a vote or you don’t have a vote depends upon the statute. If you fall within the parameters of the statute, you have a vote. If you don’t fall within the parameters of the statute, you don’t have a vote.”
freepressjournal.in
“You have shown to the country and the world what a university student, that too, a student of law, should be like. You are brilliant. You are bold and you are brave.”
telegraphindia.com
Sources
Related news
Justice Bhuyan Says Mass Voter Disenfranchisement Strikes at Constitution
Justice Bhuyan Warns SIR Must Not Deny Citizens Voting Rights
Justice Bhuyan Warns Mass Disenfranchisement Threatens Constitutional Order
Justice Bhuyan Says Mass Disenfranchisement Negates Constitutional Order
Supreme Court Justices Warn Voter Roll Revision Risks Disenfranchisement
Justice Bhuyan Criticizes Voter Roll Revision as Constitutional Negation
Vantara Appointment Revives Debate Over Retired Judges’ Roles
Former CJI Gavai Says SC/ST Act Misuse Rare, Seeks Safeguards
Thane MPs Win Sansad Ratna Awards For Second Straight Year
Supreme Court Rejects Aravalli Panel’s Six-Month Extension Plea
