The Calcutta High Court judge C.S Karnan summoned the Chief Justice of India and six judges of the Supreme Court to his ‘residential court’.
Why was the order given?
He made sweeping allegations, in a letter to the Prime Minister, against several judges.
So contempt proceedings were initiated against him by the Supreme Court for denigrating the judicial institution.
He had appeared in person before a seven-judge and was given four weeks to respond to the charge of contempt of court.
Meanwhile the current order by Karnan is in response to this contempt charge.
He summoned the CJI and 6 judges to face punishment under the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
What are the fallouts?
The judge has a long history of alleging corruption among other judges, accusing some of caste discrimination against him, and often invoking his caste identity to take complaints against his peers.
It is quite apparent that he is only further damaging his own case.
It is unacceptable affront to the apex court’s authority.
It flouts all norms of judicial conduct and thrown an open challenge to the Supreme Court.
In 2016 Justice Karnan’s gave an assurance to the Chief Justice of India that he would foster a “harmonious attitude towards one and all”.
At that time, he had expressed regret for passing a suo motu order staying his own transfer from the Madras High Court to the Calcutta High Court.
Public criticism, transfer to another High Court, being hauled up for contempt and being denied judicial work — nothing seems to restrain him.
Justice Karnan’s case vividly exposes the inadequacies of the collegium system of appointments.
This makes a better case for the infusion of greater transparency in the selection of judges.
