Only Parliament can initiate action against sitting judge: Justice Karnan
Justifying the letters written by him, Justice Karnan said “the suo motu petition is not maintainable against a sitting judge of the high court.
New Delhi: Justice C.S. Karnan, judge of the Calcutta high court, has questioned the authority and powers of Supreme Court issuing notice to initiate contempt of court proceedings and said only Parliament has power to initiate action against a sitting high court judge.
Justice Karnan, who has been asked to be personally present in the court on February 13 to show cause, refused to budge from his stated position that some of the judges of the Madras High Court are (allegedly) corrupt. In a letter addressed to the Registrar General of the apex court, he said the ‘unusual order’ passed by a seven-judge bench on February 8 affected Articles 14 (right to equality) and 21 (right to life) of the Constitution and a derogation of the principles of natural justice.
He said the suo motu contempt of court action (for his letters to the Prime Minister and other constitutional authorities alleging corruption in Madras high court) “is erroneous and has been willfully and wantonly passed with malafide intention. Therefore these proceedings may be referred to Parliament, where I will establish the high rate of corruption prevailing in the judiciary in the Madras HC.”
Justifying the letters written by him, Justice Karnan said “the suo motu petition is not maintainable against a sitting judge of the high court. I have sent representations to various government authorities regarding high irregularities and illegalities occurring at the judicial courts. I am also a responsible judge to control such high irregularities especially corruption and malpractice. I have furnished comprehensive proof of unethical practices happening with the respective courts. My main contention is only to uproot corruption prevailing at the Madras HC and not to spoil the sanctity and decorum of the court.”
Blaming the upper caste judges, he said “the order violates Article 219 of the Constitution (relating to oath by a judge) since there is distinct ill-will in it. The characteristic of this order clearly shows that the upper caste judges are taking the law in their hands and misusing their judicial power by operating the same against a SC/ST Judge (Dalit) with malafide intention to get rid of him. This order is not sustainable under law.” Alleging bias, he wanted the matter to be heard after the retirement of the Chief Justice J.S. Khehar, but if considered urgent then refer the matter to Parliament.
In February last, Justice Karnan who was shifted to Calcutta HC from Madras HC by a suo motu order stayed his transfer, prompting the Supreme Court to step in to stayed all orders passed by Justice Karnan after February 12.
Justice Karnan has been in the news for the last two years for passing various controversial orders against companion judges and the High Court Chief Justice threatening him of initiating contempt action and also to initiate action under the SC/ST Atrocities Prevention Act.