Bar&Bench News Network
The Supreme Court collegium has finally brought an end to months of controversy by withdrawing its recommendation for the elevation of Karnataka Chief Justice, P.D. Dinakaran [pictured left]. The collegium is expected to send a communication to the Law Ministry today, indefinitely putting on hold Dinakaran's elevation to the Supreme Court, a move that virtually guarantees the demise of Dinakaran's aspirations to a seat in India's apex court.
Dinakaran is also facing an impeachment motion admitted in the Rajya Sabha by Chairman Hamid Ansari on Thursday, and signed by 75 members of the Rajya Sabha. Dinakaran has consistently denied the land-grabbing charges against him, and has termed the notice for motion of impeachment "unfortunate". He has, however, stopped presiding over court proceedings since December 7, and official intimation of his continuing absence from the court was issued by the court Registrar General yesterday. The Karnataka Chief Justice did, however, rule out the possibility of resignation, insisting on his innocence.
The collegium's decision represents a significant victory for the bar associations who have been protesting Dinakaran's elevation, as well as for Supreme Court advocate Prashant Bhushan, who heads the Campaign for Judicial Accountability. Bhushan has been a key player in the anti-Dinakaran campaign, and was, in fact, instrumental in mobilizing the Rajya Sabha on the impeachment motion.
Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar of the Bombay High Court was appointed to the Supreme Court by the President yesterday. However, reports say that the elevation of Allahabad Chief Justice Chandramauli Kumar Prasad [pictured right], whose name was recommended by the collegium along with Justice Kumar, may be put on hold. The Hindustan Times reports that the Law Ministry has sent back Justice Prasad's recommendation to the collegium, on the grounds that a representation against him had been received.
While there has been a concerted movement in civil society and within the legal community in favour of judicial accountability, several commentators are worried that strong public sentiment may turn the movement into a witch hunt.
|
Be the first to post a comment 
Other News
- Re-Upped Round up May 21
- Clasis Law moves to a larger office space in Delhi
- Re-Upped Round up May 18
- SC to hear petition challenging appointment of sitting AP High Court judge; Petition alleges deliberate concealment of pending criminal investigation at the time of enrollment
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (4)










