HC Judge Says Supreme Court Thinks It's 'More Supreme', Top Court Forms 5-Judge Bench To Hear The Matter
The high court judge criticised the top court and said that the Supreme Court has a tendency to presume itself as more "Supreme" that it actually is and see high court to be lesser "high" than it is constitutionally.
The Supreme Court has initiated a suo motu case and will hear today the case pertaining to a recent controversial order by Punjab Haryana High Court judge Justice Rajbir Sehrawat, where he criticised the top court for staying proceedings in a contempt of court matter pending before his bench. The high court judge said that the Supreme Court has no role in a contempt of court proceedings pertaining to an order passed by the High Court.
Justice Sehrawat in his order observed that a stay by Supreme Court on a contempt of court case being heard by his bench can have "drastic and damaging consequences" and it seemed the top court wants to control the roaster of High Court
The high court judge passed an order observing that the Supreme Court has a tendency to presume itself as more "Supreme" that it actually is and see high court to be lesser "high" than it is constitutionally. Justice Rajbir Sehrawat went on to caution the Supreme Court about legal consequences of its order. The judge questioned the role of the Supreme Court in contempt of court cases in the high court and observed that more caution on the part of the top court would have been more appropriate.
“Seen at a psychological plane this type of order is actuated, primarily, by two factors, firstly a tendency to avoid owning responsibility of the consequence which such an order, in all likelihood, is bound to produce, under a pretense that an order of stay of contempt proceedings does not adversely affect anybody, and secondly, a tendency to presume the Supreme Court to be more 'Supreme' than it actually is and to presume a High Court to be lesser 'High' than it constitutionally is,” the judge had written about the Supreme Court's stay order.
The judge further said that the top court itself has clarified multiple times that the High Court is not subordinate to it administratively.
Taking cognisance of the order, the Supreme Court has constituted a five judge bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hrishikesh Roy to hear the matter.
“The Supreme Court has no role in this aspect except in an appeal against the order of a Division Bench of High Court convicting a contemnor. As per the provisions of the Act, even an appeal does not lie before the Supreme Court against an order passed by single-bench, rather it lies before the Division Bench of High Court, and even there, the powers of the appellate court are well defined, in terms of stage of appeal and in terms of the nature of order which the appellate Court could pass,” the single-judge said.
Justice Sehrawat further called for the Supreme Court's stay on his order in the contempt of court case in the nature of controlling the High Court's roster to decide which judge hears criminal cases.
Interestingly, Justice Sehrawat had also referred to the rules suggested by the Supreme Court for designation of advocates as Senior Advocates
"...the High Courts may still follow any type of directions coming from the Supreme Court, sometimes out of perceived coercion, sometimes out of due regard for such order, and at some other times for the sake of institutional majesty,” the judge said.
Top Headlines
