[EXCLUSIVE] Supreme Court judge Justice MR Shah on Collegium, motivated attacks on judges and Prime Minister Narendra Modi

Supreme Court judge Justice MR Shah is due to retire from office today. He was elevated as one of its judges in November 2018 and five years later, he stands out as one of the more productive judges of the Supreme Court, having authored over 700 judgments during his tenure [WATCH VIDEO].However, his tenure as a judge both at the apex court and the Gujarat and Patna High Courts (where he served prior to his elevation to the top court), were not without controversies. At one point, former Chief Justice of India TS Thakur even threatened to relieve Justice Shah, then a Gujarat High Court judge, of judicial work if the Central government did not process his transfer to another High Court.Around the same time, Justice Shah himself was the subject of allegations that he owed allegiance to 11, Akbar Road and 7, Race Course Road New Delhi, the residences of Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah. And on the basis of his rulings, some quarters branded him as a pro-government judge.Justice Shah also courted controversy when he praised PM Modi while serving as the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court..Before demitting office on Monday, Justice Shah spoke with Bar & Bench’s Debayan Roy on what he thinks about PM Modi, how heated exchanges in courtrooms are often instigated to achieve an oblique motive and more..Edited excerpts follow..Debayan Roy (DR): You delivered 712 judgments in four years at the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of India (CJI) has some 500 judgments to his credit. What is the mantra behind your productivity? .Justice MR Shah: Whatever I did was keeping in mind the litigant, the common man, who is waiting for justiceI could do it because of the grace of God, and also my hard work and labour. I consider it God's grace that I got the opportunity to serve the country. Out of 140 crore people in the country, I believe God chose me and I reached this position.I always considered work as worship. Whenever I sat in the Court, I always began my day by praying to God to give me strength and courage to do justice.I will share a secret. Whenever I began proceedings in court, I never wore shoes till I rose, because I consider this institution as a temple of justice. I learnt this when I visited a place in Patan (in Gujarat) where some litigants removed their chappals before entering the court. .DR: How were your initial years as a lawyer? .Justice Shah: When I started as an advocate, it was not in my mind at all that I would become a judge in the future, much less a Supreme Court judge. I never practiced law for money. There was one instance which shaped my life and my career. I was a junior lawyer – a period in life where everyone wants money. A bail matter came to me in what was the third round of litigation before the High Court.Fortunately, for him I got the bail. The fees was ₹2,500. Initially, he gave me ₹500. I wrote to his family to pay me the balance of fees, but nobody came. They said they did not have money. Much later, one of them came to me after selling their ornaments. I was shocked and had tears in my eyes. I gave the money back and told the person to show me the receipt that he has got back those ornaments.I learnt a lesson that day and want to convey this through you. Do not try to do anything by which a person is deprived of justice due to lack of money. You should pro bono work and serve without being selfish. .DR: What prompted you to answer the call to judgeship?.Justice Shah: I never thought I would become a judge, a High Court Chief Justice or a Supreme Court judge. But once, a Collegium judge called and said this is service to society and you have to accept it. I was in a dilemma. By then, I a good law practice and I was doing well. I did not know what to do. That judge then told me that in future, I should not raise any grievance of justice not being done or that there is no good judge. So, I accepted. .DR: When you were a judge of Gujarat High Court, then CJI TS Thakur had recommended your transfer to the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The same was never acted upon by the Central government. What do you have to say on that?.Justice Shah: The Collegium takes decisions after considering many things. Many times, the person concerned does not have any audience, but that is the system and it is working. If the government feels there is no reason to transfer a judge, there must be some valid reasons for that. Ultimately it happens, it is part of life. In fact, some bad days are always there...even today. I do not know the reasons as to why the transfer did not happen. But I have always believed God will do good to me. .DR: Do you think there will ever come a time when the Central government processes Collegium recommendations in a timely manner?.Justice Shah: I do not believe that the Central government is not responding on time. Some procedures need to be followed like Intelligence Bureau (IB) reports, so it takes time. There is no deliberate delay by the government. The Collegium system is working well, smoothly. Our Prime Minister and Law Minister are cooperating. .DR: During your tenure, you made some comments in praise of Prime Minister Narendra Modi - that he is a model and a hero. Don’t you think such statements violate the principle of separation of powers? .Justice Shah: No, not at all. I may clarify. This happened when I was Chief Justice of the Patna High Court. Some media persons came to me and said you are a hero and said you have done so many things, delivered Important judgments etc…When I left the Gujarat High Court too, everyone was in tears. Likewise for Patna. Then I said, ‘I am not the hero, hero is Prime Minister.' ..and also Prime Minister is the Prime Minister... people may have different perceptions about it. .DR: Many senior lawyers have attributed motives to you after that... Justice Shah: Who can stop them? It is their freedom of speech. .DR: Do you think the Collegium system breeds nepotism in the judiciary?. Justice Shah: Not at all. It is working very well. In the Collegium system, no one has anything personal or any agenda. Even the government takes time only because of some procedural delays and because they are also the stakeholder. .DR: How was your tenure at the Supreme Court different from that at the Gujarat High Court? .Justice Shah: At the High Court too, I worked a lot. My disposal rate was high, I tried to see that arrears came down.As a High Court judge, I had satisfaction of service to common man through legal services authorities. On Sundays, I visited talukas, legal literacy camps etc. I tried my best to see that people get the justice and benefits they are entitled to. I got cooperation from the government. At every camp, more than 7,000 to 9,000 people got help. In the Supreme Court, it was a different field. .DR: I have been told that you had an immense grip over affairs at the Gujarat High Court when you were a judge there. Did you miss that when you came to the Supreme Court?.Justice Shah: Yes. I treated everyone including the lower Judiciary as my family members and the entire institution as my own institution. I sent a strong message that you are here to perform your duty. You may be right that I was strict in administration, but then you cannot be goody-goody. But yes, everyone respected me. .DR: In October last year, you delivered an order on a Saturday suspending the acquittal of GN Saibaba. Do you think that an urgent Saturday hearing was required in that matter? In what situation do you think such a suspension of acquittal was warranted? Justice Shah: It was a judicial order and so I do not want to comment on that.As regards the Saturday hearing, it was mentioned and then CJI UU Lalit constituted the bench for Saturday. I never went to anybody. As an obedient soldier, whatever decision was taken by the CJI, I accepted it..DR: There is a lot of confusion about your recent decision staying the elevation of district judges in Gujarat. It has been reported that the promotion of the judge who convicted Rahul Gandhi in a criminal defamation case has been stayed. Would you care to bring some clarity?.Justice Shah: What is reported in the media is not correct. That order has nothing to do with one person. The issue was about merit-cum-seniority or seniority-cum-merit. The reports on social media say that the bench stayed all the 68 promotions, but those persons have not read the order. Promotions of only persons falling outside the merit list (and who were promoted based on seniority) have been stayed.I have read that the gentleman (Surat court judge in Rahul Gandhi case) is not getting the promotion. That is also not true. He is also getting the promotion on merit. He is first among the 68 in terms of merit..DR: In the same case, there was a heated exchange between you and a senior lawyer. What is your take on such face-offs with the bar?Justice Shah: First of all, such incidents should not occur. I personally believe that many times, they are deliberately done for some oblique reason or motive. The counsel may have their own interest, may be forum shopping, which should be avoided by everybody. It is nothing personal for a judge. He is always performing his duty. Ultimately, it does not affect the result. Because behind those persons, the litigants that are waiting. We are not here to punish anybody, but here to do justice as per our conscience..DR: A Bench headed by you ruled that mere membership of a banned organization is enough to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). Do you think that such legislation is still needed in India, given how it is misused?.Justice Shah: That is up to the wisdom of Parliament. This Act (UAPA) is in the national interest. So knowing full well that an organization is banned because of anti-national activity, if you continue being a member, then it shows your intention. Mere abuse of law is not a ground to challenge the law, because we have to see the object and intention. .DR: How does a judge maintain a balance between their personal beliefs and the law? .Justice Shah: No, both are different, play a different role. We have to consider litigants, facts, the law and precedents. Our personal belief has never affected the ultimate decision we give..DR: There is a perception that you are very reluctant to grant bail. In many criminal cases, you have taken a stand which is often against the accused. In tax cases, most cases would go against the assessee..Justice Shah: That is not correct. It is incorrect to say that in tax matters, I went against the assessee...It depends on the matter and the law.Take the example of Section 153 of the Income Tax Act, it is in favour of the assessee. Then on late filing of return...it is held to be in favor of assessee...just because a few orders went against them, one cannot say most cases were decided against the assessee.In bail matters too, it depends on the perception. Some believe that in triple murders or big scams, bail cannot be given.So, it is about the particular accused, facts and law. Coming from Gujarat, our perception is in murder cases, anticipatory bail cannot be given. It can be different in other states. Some judges consider the interest of the society as a whole. From the place I am coming, the crime rate is low. We may be orthodox or conservative also, but our decision is based on where we come from. .DR: You recently rejected a plea for recusal. How should a judge deal with such requests?.Justice Shah: If the attempt is to have forum shopping or for oblique reasons, why should a judge recuse? Otherwise, you are succumbing to their pressure and somebody is succeeding in their game plan. It makes no difference. .DR: Back in 2015, former Gujarat High Court Chief Justice VM Sahai had initiated a suo motu case against you and other judges over plot allotments. How did it feel being a respondent in the case as a sitting judge?.Justice Shah: It was not in good taste. I do not want to disclose the real reasons. The bungalows were constructed using our own funds. I do not want to comment further. You can say that some things should not have happened. The plots were given at 50 per cent of the market value. .DR: Were you shocked when you found that the case was registered? .Justice Shah: Yes. We were served notice by the Registry at 2 AM..DR: Looking back at your career, do you feel there is any judgment you could have dealt with differently?.Justice Shah: I will share one experience which gave me immense satisfaction. In one case, some six persons were given death sentences. Their review petition was dismissed. I was new at the time. Another review petition was filed stating that the death sentence should be heard by three judges. We felt that this was a clear case of acquittal, because six persons were there and one person was in jail for a number of years and had psychological problems. We were in a dilemma as to what to do. Six poor tribal persons. So ultimately, we acquitted all. We exercised powers under Article 142 and awarded compensation of ₹5 lakh to each. That was one of my best judgments, a wrong was remedied. This is my certificate. I do not bother about other certificates..DR: Do you think the retirement age of judges should should be reviewed?.Justice Shah: Definitely. I am not saying this because I am retiring. But for High Court and Supreme Court judges, it is not an age to retire. It should be at least 70..DR: What is your view on post retirement jobs? .Justice Shah: I have not taken leave in 19 years. My leave travel concession (LTCs) was used for going to my hometown. So I will not take up any assignments like tribunals etc. I have my own reasons why not to be in these roles after the Supreme Court of India..[Watch Video]