 |
|
Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, the first Sikh Chief Justice of India and a Padma awardee for 'public affairs', left an indelible mark on the Indian judicial landscape. His tenure, however, was characterized by a notable divergence from the prevailing views of the Union government. This frequent clash of opinions highlights a crucial aspect of judicial independence, showcasing a judge who wasn't afraid to challenge established power dynamics and interpret constitutional principles based on his understanding of justice, even when it meant disagreeing with the executive branch. This analysis will delve into several key decisions made by Justice Khehar that directly contradicted governmental positions, illustrating the complexity and importance of his judicial legacy.
One of the most striking examples of this dissonance is Justice Khehar's minority verdict upholding triple talaq, or instant divorce in Islam, as a fundamental right. This decision, delivered in August 2017 during the final month of his tenure as Chief Justice, contrasted sharply with the Centre's argument that instant talaq wasn't fundamental to Islamic practice and violated principles of dignity and non-discrimination. Justice Khehar, presiding over a multi-faith Constitution Bench, found the centuries-old practice to be an integral part of religious freedom, highlighting the delicate balance between religious freedoms and fundamental rights within the Indian constitution. This decision sparked significant national debate, exposing the clash between tradition, religious freedom, and gender equality within the legal framework.
Further underscoring his independence, Justice Khehar, while leading a nine-judge bench, elevated the right to privacy to the status of a fundamental right, a decision that directly contradicted the government's view of privacy as merely a common law right, secondary to public interest. The government had characterized the concept of privacy as elitist, arguing that it should yield to considerations of national security and public good. However, Justice Khehar’s ruling cemented privacy as an integral component of Article 21, the right to life and personal liberty. This decision demonstrated a judicial commitment to protecting individual autonomy and safeguarding the dignity of all citizens, even when facing opposition from the political establishment.
In October 2015, while serving as a Supreme Court Collegium member, Justice Khehar faced immense pressure to recuse himself from a case challenging the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. Despite this pressure, he bravely declared the NJAC Act unconstitutional. This Act sought to give politicians and civil society members a significant role in appointing judges to the highest courts of India. Justice Khehar's decision, a landmark judgment, decisively rejected the government's claim that the NJAC represented the “will of the people” and was beyond judicial review. He argued that allowing the executive to share power in judicial appointments would compromise the independence of the judiciary. This illustrates a crucial commitment to safeguarding the judiciary's autonomy from political influence.
The decision to overturn the BJP-backed rebel Congress government of Kalikho Pul in Arunachal Pradesh in 2016 further showcases Justice Khehar’s willingness to challenge the political landscape. The Supreme Court, under his leadership, quashed the then Arunachal Pradesh Governor's decision to advance the Assembly session which led to President's rule, paving the way for Congress’s Nabam Tuki’s government’s reinstatement. This intervention underscored the court's role in protecting constitutional order and ensuring fairness in state governance. The aftermath of this decision, however, included allegations leveled against Justice Khehar following the suicide of Kalikho Pul, highlighting the challenges and controversies that accompany judicial activism.
Beyond his high-profile constitutional decisions, Justice Khehar also demonstrated a firm commitment to accountability within the judiciary. He led a seven-judge Bench that sentenced a sitting Madras High Court judge to six months’ imprisonment for contempt of court. This unprecedented action demonstrated the court's resolve to uphold its integrity and maintain high standards of conduct amongst its members. His involvement in the investigation of Justice P.D. Dinakaran and his defense of Justice V. Ramaswami further exemplifies a commitment to justice within the judicial system.
In conclusion, Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar’s judicial legacy is defined by his courageous decisions that frequently challenged the established views of the government. His decisions on issues such as triple talaq, the right to privacy, and the NJAC Act serve as a powerful reminder of the crucial role of an independent judiciary in upholding constitutional principles and safeguarding fundamental rights. His actions, while not without controversy, contributed significantly to shaping the judicial discourse and demonstrating the significance of judicial independence in a vibrant democracy. The lasting impact of his decisions continues to be debated and analyzed, underscoring their complexity and significance in the Indian legal system.
Source: Padma awardee JS Khehar’s decisions often contradicted government views