Young and recently minted senior counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan walked out of a constitution bench hearing on land acquisition after the Supreme Court’s Justice Arun Mishra chastised him for making “repetitive” arguments that had already been made by senior counsel Shyam Divan earlier, as reported by News18 yesterday:
As Sankaranarayanan asked the bench if he could argue his point once he advances submissions on Section 24, Justice Mishra said, “Are you retorting? Are you retorting to us? How dare you?”
“Don’t say a word anymore,” Justice Mishra further told Sankaranarayanan. “One more word and I will not only issue contempt against you but will also ensure you are convicted.”
At this, Sankaranarayanan shut his files and walked out of the court room.
Sankaranarayanan later commented to News18: “I would not wish to argue in an atmosphere which would lower the dignity of the court. I would not wish to say anything more.”
Update 14:20: As pointed out in a comment below, Sankaranarayanan (and Divan) had both previously requested Mishra’s recusal for having ruled in the Indore Development Authority case, which is being considered before this Constitution Bench.
Update 16:02: Bar & Bench has reported that apparently the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) has come out in a resolution reminding Mishra to be a “little more patient in dealing with lawyers”, while Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), senior advocate Vikas Singh wrote in a letter that: “Terrorising lawyers under the threat of contempt and not allowing them to argue under that threat undermines the very fundamentals of the justice delivery system.”
Thanks to several readers for sharing.
Comments
What exactly is inherently "Indian" in the system? Sure, we modified it, but it totally western.
During the recusal hearing, Sankaranarayanan had submitted that the judge ought to recuse, as otherwise he would have to decide whether he was himself guilty of judicial indiscipline in overruling the judgment of a co-ordinate bench.
Maaf karna gusse mein Zara idhar udhar nikal jata hu!!!!!
When clear evidence of multi-crore scams and other instances of institutional corruption and abuse of office/position is presented, the man in question does exactly this. Shout, insult, threaten, play victim, shed a (crocodile) tear and other such distractions to ensure that inconvenient details get suppressed.
He is unlikely to take note that even Thor lost his hammer and given his obsession to use it on every nail maybe someday he may just nail himself into....especially now that the Loya case may get resurrected again.
I can really feel what GS felt but the man in question has become quite predictable for us. And we totally expect him to put up yet another nauseating show in an upcoming meeting.
With people like him in governing bodies and selection committees and ably supported by the minions of the state does anyone really expect positive changes to happen in a certain law school? Do students really stand a chance against such a band of....?
Maybe this is how things are at in many NLUs, which may explain the state of perpetual crises irrespective of the so-called "changes" in administration.
And what should students in a certain law school do when this fine judge not only behaves in this manner but it is timed to suppress any exposure and discussion of institutional corruption? But we are thankful to him and stellar cast of state representatives for showing us how things really work in hallowed spaces. That's a very handy experience/learning which we would have probably learnt (if at all) many years later depending on our career pathways.
let us leave some decorum and ask why and what he retorted on
Makes me wonder if there are more such stunts. I am sure if you investigate you will find same kind of publicity seeking stunts right from college days.
changing spots and dogs tail and all that.
That said, look at the status of Indian judicial system - seniors want to return the gowns, juniors clamouring for gown only to be treated like shit by a judge.
because ...as said universally...one cannot be student and also examiner for the same examination.
The question of bias does not come......it is basic ethics .