Justice Karnan Arrest – All About It

Justice Karnan Arrest – All About It


The imprisonment of Justice C.S. Karnan, who recently retired as a judge of the Calcutta High Court, for contempt is the culmination of a series of unfortunate and unpleasant developments. It was a step that was best avoided in the interest of maintaining the dignity of the judiciary. It is indeed true that Justice Karnan’s offences in making wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations against a number of fellow judges, and his tactics of intimidation against Chief Justices who tried over the years to discipline him, were shocking and completely unacceptable. However, a Supreme Court that allowed him to enter the hallowed portals of the higher judiciary would have done better had it adopted a more pragmatic approach. Mr. Karnan was due to retire and it would have been sufficient if he was allowed to do so under a dark cloud of dishonour, after spending his last days in office stripped of judicial work. It is an extraordinarily low moment for the institution that a man who the Supreme Court felt needed his mental health evaluated should be sentenced for contempt of court, arrested and sent to jail. As for alternatives to imprisonment, recommending his impeachment to Parliament was a possibility the Supreme Court may have also done well to consider. There is no defence of Justice Karnan’s disdainful refusal to answer the contempt charge or going into hiding to avoid arrest for nearly seven weeks — actions that only served to reinforce his waywardness and disregard for the law.

It is also time for some introspection within the judiciary on the manner in which judges are chosen. That someone as ill-suited to judicial office as Justice Karnan entered the superior judiciary exposes the inadequacies of the collegium system. The absence of a mechanism to discipline recalcitrant judges is another glaring lacuna in the existing system. With the Constitution prescribing impeachment by Parliament, a long-winded and cumbersome process, as the sole means to remove a judge, Chief Justices of the High Courts are at their wits’ end when it comes to dealing with refractory judges who are not amenable to any discipline or capable of self-restraint. Non-allotment of judicial work and transfer to another High Court are measures available for the purpose, but in Mr. Karnan’s case these hardly had any chastening effect. Instead, he continued to make the self-serving claim that he was being victimised because he was a Dalit. He now has the option of moving the court to seek suspension of his sentence or appealing to the President for its remission. No one would really grudge Mr. Karnan an opportunity to secure his liberty, but one can only hope that in future he does not use his time in prison to play to the gallery and portray himself as a martyr in the cause of fighting corruption in the judiciary.

Arrest of Justice Karnan

Taking exception to a senior High Court judge’s conduct, the constitution bench of the Supreme Court brought Justice C.S. Karnan’s seven-year career to a halt on Wednesday.
A seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court has directed Justice Karnan — presently with the Calcutta High Court — to appear before it on February 13, 2017 to speak out before the apex court initiates contempt charges. In a first where a judge has been served a show cause notice pending contempt charges, Justice Karnan has been pulled up for making comments against members of the judiciary.

On January 23, 2017, Justice Karnan had published an open letter to the prime minister naming “an initial list” of 20 sitting and retired Supreme Court and High Court judges, accusing them of corruption. In it, Justice Karnan had suggested that they be investigated through interrogation by central agencies.
The bench, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI), Justice JS Khehar, asked Justice Karnan to appear in person and answer the charges and have stripped him off his administrative and judicial powers till then.
In what also appears to be a first, Justice Karnan will appear in person to defend the contempt case after the Supreme Court allowed him to do so by a January 5 order.
The Attorney General of India Mukul Rohatgi argued on Wednesday that the judge should be made an example of to “protect the judiciary”.
Justice Karnan has had a controversial career since his appointment in 2009 and came to notice last year when he stayed a court order against his own transfer from the Madras High Court. Then chief justice of Madras HC, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, as well as his colleagues had found it difficult to work with Justice Karnan.

CS Karnan was a government counsel, with 25 years of experience as a lawyer, when his name was recommended by Justice (retd) AK Ganguly, then the chief justice of Madras High Court. Other members of the collegium did not know him well and some even remarked that he had not appeared before them. They had accepted the appointment based on Justice Ganguly’s recommendation, which appears to have been made to accomodate a Dalit judge in the senior judicary.
As reported in The Hindu, Justice Ganguly has since said that he doesn’t remember how his name came up in the first place. Justice Ganguly said that he appointed Karnan because “he represented a certain community that should be represented in the choice of judges.”
Justice Ganguly had also said that he did have a soft corner for Justice Karnan and thought him to be a good man, though probably misguided.
Later, Justice Karnan has himself described the collegium system as ‘autocratic’.


Mr. Karnan had a long history of confrontation and conflict with his colleagues in the High Court and many of them were so afraid of his threats and harassment that they wanted to seek voluntary transfer to other High Courts.
In 2011, Justice Karnan had written to the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) complaining of victimisation by the other judges because he was a Dalit.
He invited members of the press into his chambers and held a press conference there alleging victimisation at the hand of 4-5 of his brother judges.
The letter alleged that, at a wedding, a judge sitting next to Justice Karnan had crossed his legs to “deliberately touch mine”.
Several members of the judiciary found the letter to be in poor taste when the complaint became public. The NCSC had forwarded it to then CJI, late Justice SH Kapadia, since it was related to members of the senior judiciary.
In 2013, Justice Karnan had passed a much-criticised judgment which created a new law. Penal law allows a woman to approach a court when a man deserts a woman after pre-marital sex with a promise to marry her. Justice Karnan ruled that apart from the penal law, the woman could claim social status as his wife if the man were 21 and single and the woman 18 and single and that the premise of the pre-marital sex was marriage.
Advertisement opens in new window

He later went on to explicitly prohibit criticism of this order through a gag order.
In January 2014, Justice Karnan crashed into another courtroom where a two-judge bench was hearing a PIL on selection of judges and started arguing. He launched into an outburst against the unfair and biased selection of judges and said he would file an affidavit on the issue before that court.
The Supreme Court described his behaviour uncharitable, ungenerous and indecorous because sitting judges don’t appear or argue before another court, least of all, at another courtroom of the court where he himself sits. In fact, even after retirement or resignation, HC judges can only appear before other High Courts and the Supreme Courts. Most former HC judges only practice before the apex court.
Then chief justice of Madras HC, RK Agrawal, had asked then CJI, Justice P Sathasivam, to transfer Justice Karnan saying that other judges were afraid of him and that Justice Karnan had barged into his chamber “hurling a volley of invectives”.
Advertisement opens in new window

Justice Karnan hit back with another complaint to the NCSC alleging caste-based discrimination. He also wrote to the CJI to stay the transfer request till he had proved the allegations he had earlier made.
In August 2014, when Justice Kaul was appointed as Madras HC chief justice, Justice Karnan launched into a one-man attack against many of the judges. He supposedly hurled accusations at the judges, who fell silent. It is believed that the issue was again based on discrimination. 20 judges sent a memorandum to the CJI asking that Justice Karnan be transferred since they found it difficult to work with him.
In 2015, Justice Karnan publicly alleged that another judge had sexually harassed an intern in his chamber — an allegation that he has since been unable to substantiate.

In late 2015, he wrote a letter to Justice Kaul saying he was going on a long leave because of the ‘dummy cases’ he was being allotted.
Justice Karnan, who belongs to a Dalit community, had alleged caste-based discrimination by Justice Kaul. He said that the collegium system preferred ‘high caste candidates’.

The Madras HC Registrar General took exception to this allegation and approached the Supreme Court immediately. In In February 2016, the apex court transferred him to Calcutta HC.
Justice Karnan retorted and suo motu stayed the CJI’s order of his own transfer, citing a nine-bench judgment of the Supreme Court. He also directed the CJI to file written submissions regarding the transfer. Justice Karnan had even called for a press conference inside his chambers yet again.

A bench of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Khehar (before he was appointed CJI), directed the Madras HC to stop giving him work and eventually Justice Karnan made his way to the Calcutta HC.
In Calcutta HC, he had a public spat with Justice AK Roy, who was heading their two-judge bench. In the Vivekananda Flyover collapse, several people had been killed when a flyover collapsed in the heart of Kolkata. The two-judge bench had refused bail to the accused. Later, Justice Karnan changed the order from his chambers, allowing bail to the accused. The then chief justice of the Calcutta HC had to remove Justice Karnan to a single-judge bench to hear education matters.

Confrontation and Conflict with Colleagues

Mr. Karnan had a long history of confrontation and conflict with his colleagues in the High Court and many of them were so afraid of his threats and harassment that they wanted to seek voluntary transfer to other High Courts.

A memorandum signed by 20 judges recounts an incident at an official dinner at the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy in honour of new Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. Mr. Karnan first sat in a lounge and started abusing the High Court’s Registrars. Later, he entered the Library Hall, where the judges were waiting, and “started abusing the judges in filthy language.”

They said, “He went on taunting every judge assembled at the dinner meet and challenged them to reply to his unwarranted, unimaginable and unpalatable questions…”

They also recalled that he had misbehaved at a Full Court meeting held when Justice Satish K. Agnihotri was the Acting CJ.

Mr. Karnan also raised issues concerning selection of judges alleging that corruption and favouritism were behind the names being considered. He frequently threatened to file complaints before the NCSC against judges and officials.

A similar case of contempt was initiated by the Supreme Court when lawyer Prashant Bhushan had alleged that half of the former chief justices of India were corrupt. Served a notice, Bhushan filed an affidavit with evidence corroborating his statement. Truth is a defence in contempt of court matters.
Most recently, Justice (retd) Markandey Katju was pulled up for criticising a Supreme Court bench. He had made comments in social media on a murder case.
The Supreme Court asked him to appear and explain his comments and later issued him a contempt notice. AG Rohatgi had argued that the comments may have been intemperate but not necessarily contemptuous.
Veteran jurist, Fali Nariman, appeared on his behalf and Katju tendered an unconditional apology. Since then, his comments on social media have been more measured.
While the matter was being heard, Nariman issued a temporary gag order on Katju, who stayed noticeably absent from social media sites for a while.
In Justice Karnan’s case, the allegations have been made through a public letter. He will have to produce some evidence regarding his allegations against topmost judges. One of them is Justice Sankay Jishan Kaul is a sitting SC judge. Another is Justice Ibrahim Kalifulla, who retired in July, last year.

Reference : http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnan-a-long-history-of-confrontation-with-colleagues/article19120825.ece



Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.