Bar&Bench News Network
Hamid Ansari, the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, on Saturday ordered the constitution of a 3-member panel under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, to investigate the charges against Karnataka Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran. The panel headed by Justice V.S. Sirpurkar [pictured] of the Supreme Court, comprises Andhra Pradesh Chief Justice A.R. Dave and Senior Counsel P.P. Rao. The committee was constituted after 75 Rajya Sabha Members signed a petition asking the Chairman to initiate impeachment proceedings against Justice Dinakaran.
Justice Dinakaran, whose elevation to the Supreme Court has been put indefinitely on hold after charges of land grabbing and possession of disproportionate assets were brought against him in September last year. The Chief Justice has currently passed on all judicial duties to a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court, but continues to preside over the administrative duties of the Court, a move that faces stiff opposition from the members of the Bar and the Bench.
Several jurists have already emphasised a need for speed in the inquiry proceedings against Justice Dinakaran. The impeachment proceedings against Justice Soumitra Sen, for example, are still pending, despite the fact that impeachment proceedings had been started on the recommendation of the Chief Justice in September 2008. The 3-member committee investigating charges of financial misconduct against Justice Sen saw several changes, with Justice D.K. Jain opting out of the committee in June 2009 on the grounds of prior commitments. He was then replaced by Justice Sudershan Reddy, who chaired the panel comprising Chief Justice Tirath Singh Thakur of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, and Senior Counsel Fali S. Nariman. Justice Thakur's elevation to the Supreme Court in November left the committee one member short, a vacancy that was filled only in December by the new Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice Mukul Mudgal.
"With the large number of cases pending in the courts, we cannot afford vacancies in the High Court," said an advocate of the Karnataka High Court, who did not wish to be named. "The matter of Justice Dinakaran must be resolved quickly," he added.
|
Be the first to post a comment 
Related Stories
- After Justice Dinakaran, probe panel in hot water: Forum for Judicial Accountability seeks recusal of Justice Sirpurkar
- Victory for Forum of Judicial Accountability: Justice Sirpurkar recuses himself from Dinakaran probe panel
- Justice Alam replaces Sirpurkar in Dinakaran probe panel
- SC allows contempt plea by Salve; Prashant Bhushan faces contempt; calls for impeachment of Justice Dinakaran
- Dinakaran din; after P.P. Rao, Justice Sirpurkar's turn
- Justice Arijit Pasayat to head newly constituted Competition Appellate Tribunal
- No SC for Dinakaran; Allahabad Chief Justice's elevation may be on hold
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)










