Pegasus Snooping & Gogoi Saga : SC To Reopen Suo Motu Case

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

• In April 2019, the sexual harassment allegations that were levelled by a Supreme Court staff against the then Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, has initiated this suo motu case titled In Re Matter Of Great Public Importance Touching Upon The Independence Of Judiciary.
• Gogoi immediately responsed to the allegations that were made. A Division Bench comprising of Justices Arun Mishra and Sanjiv Khanna were convened to hear this suo motu case.
• In the absence of the complainant, Gogoi attempted to discredit her and dubbed the complaint as a part of a 'larger conspiracy' which was hatched by plotters and fixers to destabilize the Supreme Court.
• Another court Bench comprising of Justices Arun Mishra, RF Nariman and Deepak Gupta appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice AK Patnaik to look into the 'larger conspiracy' angle, and take assistance of the CBI, IB and Delhi Police.
• In the mean time, an in-house enquiry was conducted by three Supreme Court judges. The Bench comprised of Justices SA Bobde, Indu Malhotra & Indira Banerjee, and they gave clean chit to Gogoi. The complainant withdrew expressing the apprehensions of biasness in the decision.

AFTER GOGOI’S RETIREMENT

• The complainant, who was earlier dismissed from service, was reinstated by the Supreme Court with full back wages, after the retirement of Gogoi.
• Earlier, her husband and brother-in-law, who were posted with Delhi Police, were also suspended from their job after she was fired from her's. They were also reinstated to their respective services later.

DECISION IN FEBRUARY

• Justice Pattnaik submitted his enquiry report in 2019, while Gogoi was still the CJI.
• The Supreme Court Bench consisting of Justices SK Kaul, AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian discussed over this case for over a year.
• While closing the suo moto case in February 2021, they observed that, as over two years have passed, the possibility of recovery of electronic record is rare.
• Now that the scope of the enquiry and the power of the learned Judge are limited, continuing with the proceedings will not serve any useful purpose.

PRESENT SCENARIO

• Now,the controversial tenure of CJI Gogoi has come to focus. During that period the Apex Court, through its actions and inactions, had protected and furthered the interests of the Executive on various instances.
• In several other cases like the infructuous verdict in the CBI-Alok Verma case, the shaky clean chit was given to Centre in the Rafale scam and the indefinite delaying of the hearing in the case challenging electoral bonds scheme, etc., the Supreme Court was seen delivering to the Government favourable decisions.
• Considering the Pegasus reports are true, they indicate a connecting bridge between the executive and judicial branches during Gogoi’s term. This leaves a stain on the concept of judicial independence.

PEGASUS SNOOPING IN CONNECTION WITH GOGOI CASE

• Now, the Pegasus controversy is once again compelling a concerned citizen to revisit the scandal-ridden and disgraceful term of Gogoi as the CJI.
• As the reports suggest, the mobile number of the staffer who had raised sexual harassment allegations against Gogoi and her family members were found in the potential list of Pegasus targets.
• The reports indicate that after the woman became public with her complaint; their numbers were selected as potential targets soon after that while a forensic examination of the devices is essential to confirm if they were actually hacked by the spyware.
• These disturbing reports must be seen in the light of the statement made by NSO, the Israeli company which makes the Pegasus spyware, that its sells its services only to "vetted governments".
• But the Government of India is yet to make a clear and categorical statement about the use of Pegasus services.

MADRAS BAR ASSOCIATION CASE

• The quote from judgements of Madras Bar Association fits this scenario completely.
• It states that,separation of powers between the three organs, i.e., the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, is a consequence of the principles of equality that are enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution.
• Any incursion into the judicial domain by the other two wings of the Government would, thus, be considered as unconstitutional.

FINAL ANSWERS

• Whether the Pegasus scandal has any connections in creating circumstances for the judicial kowtowing to the executive during Gogoi's term as CJI, is still unanswered.
• Therefore, there is an urgent need for the Supreme Court to re-open the suo motu case on 'larger conspiracy' and examine if there was any attempt made to put the woman complainant and her family under surveillance and any effort to gain control over judiciary through any such means.
• The Court must find answers to the questions relating to the sexual harassment scandal; lest this issue will remain a permanent scar on the judiciary.
• In the light of new developments that have taken place, the name given to the suo motu case, which had then sounded vacuous, gets a meaning.
• Now indeed, it has become a matter of great public importance touching upon the independence of judiciary.

What do you think about this case?