Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

Jurists differ on CJI sitting on bench

By The Assam Tribune
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Whatsapp
  • Telegram
  • Linkedin
  • Print
  • koo
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Whatsapp
  • Telegram
  • Linkedin
  • Print
  • koo
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Whatsapp
  • Telegram
  • Linkedin
  • Print
  • koo

NEW DELHI, April 20 - Should Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi have been part of the bench that heard the matter related to allegations of sexual harassment levelled against him by a woman?

The question is being discussed by jurists even though the CJI opted out midway in the hearing and left it to the other two judges, who were nominated to be part of the bench, to take a call on passing the judicial order.

While noted jurist Rakesh Dwivedi preferred to speak on record on the issue, other senior advocates agreed to express their views, but wished not to reveal their names.

Dwivedi termed as �unusual, extraordinary and unlawful� the hearing on allegations of sexual harassment against Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi by a bench headed by the CJI himself. �My firm view is that the CJI should not have presided over the bench. It is a settled principle that no one should be a judge of his own cause,� he said.

A senior law officer said there was nothing wrong in the CJI sitting in the three-judge bench as he had already made it clear that he will not be a part of the judicial order which would be passed by the other two judges of the bench.

Another senior advocate said the CJI should have kept himself away from the bench as the allegations were against him. �Ideally, I would have respected the CJI�s move if he had not involved himself in the bench,� he said, adding there was a need for taking the matter to the logical end.

An attempt was made to contact some of the former chief justices of India on the issue, but they said they did not want to be drawn into the controversy. � PTI

More in Entertainment
Next Story
Similar Posts
Jurists differ on CJI sitting on bench

NEW DELHI, April 20 - Should Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi have been part of the bench that heard the matter related to allegations of sexual harassment levelled against him by a woman?

The question is being discussed by jurists even though the CJI opted out midway in the hearing and left it to the other two judges, who were nominated to be part of the bench, to take a call on passing the judicial order.

While noted jurist Rakesh Dwivedi preferred to speak on record on the issue, other senior advocates agreed to express their views, but wished not to reveal their names.

Dwivedi termed as �unusual, extraordinary and unlawful� the hearing on allegations of sexual harassment against Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi by a bench headed by the CJI himself. �My firm view is that the CJI should not have presided over the bench. It is a settled principle that no one should be a judge of his own cause,� he said.

A senior law officer said there was nothing wrong in the CJI sitting in the three-judge bench as he had already made it clear that he will not be a part of the judicial order which would be passed by the other two judges of the bench.

Another senior advocate said the CJI should have kept himself away from the bench as the allegations were against him. �Ideally, I would have respected the CJI�s move if he had not involved himself in the bench,� he said, adding there was a need for taking the matter to the logical end.

An attempt was made to contact some of the former chief justices of India on the issue, but they said they did not want to be drawn into the controversy. � PTI

More in Entertainment
Similar Posts