Judges conduct should be exemplary both within and outside

Judges conduct should be exemplary both within and outside

Rejecting Sikkim Chief Justice P D Dinakaran's plea that he can't be impeached for alleged misconduct not connected with discharge of judicial duties, the Supreme Court on Friday said a judge's conduct "must be exemplary" both within and outside the court.

A bench of justices G S Singhvi and C K Patnaik said a judge cannot walk into a shopping mall, pick up an article of his choice and simply walk away without footing the bill.

"His conduct must be exemplary. He is liable for his actions. There cannot be aberrations. He cannot go to the shopping mall, pick up anything and walk out without paying," the bench remarked.

"Any conduct that brings down the dignity of the court cannot be accepted," the bench remarked.

The apex court made the remarks after senior counsel Basava Prabhu Patil and Romy Chacko, appearing for Justice Dinakaran, aruged a judge's conduct which was not connected with the discharge of his/her official duties cannot be part of any impeachment motion.

The counsel cited Article 124(4) of the Constitution that judges enjoy immunity from any prosecution or impeachment for misconduct unless the same was related to the discharge of the official duty.

Sensing the mood of the court, the counsel then admitted the conduct of the judges should be exemplary both within and outside the court.

Senior counsel U U Lalit, appearing for the Rajya Sabha appointed three-member panel, agreed with Justice Dinakaran's contention that the committee received complaints even after the motion for impeachment was introduced in Parliament.

Admitting that the complaints were received and additional charges were framed, the counsel, however, clarified that the same were merely "elaboration and refinement" of the charges framed by Parliament which would in no way prejudice the interest of Justice Dinakaran.

The arguments would resume on Tuesday.

Justice Dinkaran had moved the Supreme Court on two grounds contending that the panel had exceeded its jurisdiction by framing 14 charges on the basis of fresh complaints whereas there were only 12 charges at the time when the motion was introduced in Parliament.

It was argued that the committee should restrict itself to the original 12 charges instead of inviting further complaints from various persons, which was not permissible under the law, the counsel argued.

Dinakaran had also sought recusal of senior advocate P P Rao on the ground that he was allegedly biased against him as he was part of a delegation which had met the then Chief Justice K G Balarkrishnan to oppose his elevation to the Supreme Court.

The apex court had on 29th April  stayed the probe by the Rajya Sabha-appointed panel after Dinakaran expressed apprehension of a biased inquiry by it in view of Rao's presence in the panel and the committee had exceeded its jurisdiction.

The bench had also asked the committee's counsel to respond to Dinkaran's plea.

The committee is headed by Justice Aftab Alam of the Supreme Court and includes Karnataka High Court Chief Justice J S Khehar and Rao.

Justice Dinakaran had early this week moved another application in the apex court against the ongoing probe contending it has exceeded its jurisdiction in probing charges of judicial misconduct and corruption against him.