PAST VIEWS BY MEMBERS CANNOT BE GROUND TO DISCREDIT A COMMITTEE3 min read

By- Yashori Shekhar

On Tuesday, the Chief Justice of India (CJI)indicated that it was utterly unjustified to condemn the three members of an Expert Committee fashioned by the Supreme Court to hear farmers’ considerations regarding the brand new farm legal guidance.

“A bench headed by CJI Bobde said, commenting on a case unrelated to farmer protests or farm legal guidelines, “We find there is some misconception of the rules. If we select a committee and we feel that the representatives have voiced their views on the issue, they do have the ability to continue.

The CJI was candid to acknowledge, without removing any names, that people assigned to a committee were free to specify their opinions on the issue they were known to take into account. People are supposed to be educated and knowledgeable in general. You are entitled to have your opinion offered. There is a lack of knowledge of how a committee is composed. This is not a case in which anyone claims racism against a person whose parent is a receiver.

The outburst of the Court got here in a suo moto concerned with discussing inadequacies and shortcomings in felony courts after the lockdown. Senior lawyer Sidharth Luthra was a part of the Court’s three-member committee to review the foundations framed by different High Courts and propose amendments to rules to encourage early disposal of felony proceedings. In this phase, he supported senior lawyer R Basanth and advocate Okay Parmeshwar.

Luthra said, “We are moving towards a hybrid system today and standards must be laid down to have a mix of physical and virtual proceedings for not only hearings, but also video-conference trials.”

Luthra was asked by the bench, which also included Justices L Nageswara Rao and Vineet Saran, to assist them in this respect as amicus curiae. But Luthra claimed that his input freely endorsing video conferencing which go to him in search of this transparency as regards bodily court docket hearings. This encouraged the CJI to move beyond the assertion above.

Justice Bobde said, “Where is your disqualification question?” Everyone has the freedom to express their mind. The Court’s findings appeared to sit well with the sense of the four-member committee it named to hear farmers’ complaints and to send a report within eight weeks. Bhupinder Singh Mann (National President, BKU and All India Kisan Coordination Committee), Pramod Kumar Joshi (Agricultural Economist, Director for South Asia, Foreign Food Policy Research Institute), Ashok Gulati (Agricultural Economist and Former Chairman of the Commission on Agricultural Costs and Prices) and Anil Ghanwatatat formed a four-member committee on 12 January.

Much before the committee could begin its work, reports spread regarding the comments made by the four representatives on the pro-farm rule, while questions arose as to whether the Court’s appointment was fair. One of the representatives, Bhupinder Singh Mann, resigned from the Committee on 14 January, leaving only three members to complete the mission given to the Court. Last week, Bhartiya Kisan Union (BKU) – Lokshakti, one of the protesting farmers’ unions, filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court seeking the expulsion of the three senators, alleging that they were biased in favour of farm rules. On Wednesday, this affidavit would come up for scrutiny by the high court along with a plea by the Delhi Police to prohibit protesting farmers groups from conducting a tractor rally on Republic Day. The three-member commission, meanwhile, has already begun its work and is scheduled to consult with farmers’ organisations on Thursday.

In a suo moto case connected to resolving inadequacies and shortcomings in judicial proceedings after the lockdown, the Court’s outburst arrived. Senior lawyer Sidharth Luthra was a part of a three-member committee set up by the Court to study the rules developed by different High Courts and to propose amendments to the rules to encourage the early disposal of criminal proceedings. He aided senior lawyer R Basanth and lawyer K Parmeshwar on this assignment.

READ ALSO- Insider trading of lands in Amaravati: HC quashes CID FIR





(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});