In the din of the cricket scam, an astounding event passedvirtually unnoticed. It involved the Supreme Court. A few weeks ago, this column wrote:"Never show contempt for the judiciary. That is against the law." Now one is notso sure.
Earlier, contempt of court, or anything perceived to becontempt by any honourable judge, could attract dire results. Recall the recent incidentat the New Delhi Railway Station. An Allahabad High Court judge had no reserved berth on adeparting train. He could not be accommodated. As the train started to leave, he orderedthe compartment chain to be pulled. He then constituted an open court at the railwaystation itself. He charged the station master with contempt. Under threat of arrest, thestation master begged forgiveness, humiliating himself before bemused members of thepublic.
Early this month, something very different occurred. The editor of a small tabloidpublished its comment on a sworn affidavit by a former inmate of Tihar jail. The affidavitstated that a retired chief justice of the Supreme Court and his brother judge consortedwith the accused in a case being heard by them, accepted money from him and committed actsof moral turpitude.
The former chief justice categorically denied all charges. His brother judge admittedthat he had met the accused without knowing he was the person whose case was before him incourt. Meanwhile, the editor and the former Tihar inmate tried their best to publicisetheir charges through privately circulated letters and the media. They met with limitedsuccess.
Finally, the Supreme Court Bar Council swung into action. It filed a contempt of courtcase against the editor and the former Tihar inmate. Last fortnight, the Supreme Courtpassed its brief order. It ruled that the article in the tabloid was prima faciecontemptuous. But it also said that the high footing of the accused judges could not beaffected by such writing. Therefore, the editor and the other were let off with the hopethat they would be more discreet in future!
What might one conclude from this order? Are journalists allowed to accuse judges oflacking integrity? Or are judges allowed to decide each case whimsically? Or would thehearing of this case have embarrassed the concerned judges?
Time will show. The editor concerned has subsequently accused the present Chief Justiceof India of misconduct. Will he too be unaffected because of his high footing?
A big mutation
Of reputation
Can neither harm
Nor cause alarm!
