A constitution bench comprising of 5 judges in the matter of Jayantilal Ratanchand Shah V/s. RBI (1996) 9 SCCl 650 upheld the constitutional validity of High Denomination Bank Notes ( Demonetisation) Act, 1978. The Act was challenged after Janata Party government under Morarje Desai demonetised high denomination bank notes and therefore Supreme Court comprising of 2 judges CJI TS Thakur and DY Chandrachud being in minority should have dismissed the petition at the threshold instead of giving lecture on break out of riots. Barring a few stray incidents, people from all sections appreciated the decision of the government to demonetise 500 and 1000 currency notes and the SC did not have any data or material based on which an inference of a riot like situation could have been drawn. Such observation was unwanted, unwarranted and uncalled for the apex court should have refrained from making such comment which the judges should have known would be made use of by political parties amassed illegal wealth. In the next 2 days the Congress Party staged a nation wide protest and some may even really engineer riots to support SC observation !
Unwanted observation seems to have been made by the Chief Justice Thakur to suit political opponents of the government in power that too when the bench was bound by the earlier decision of the constitution bench. Matters are dismissed in less than 2 minutes in the SC and hence there was no propriety for Justice Thakur to entertain the petition.
Not staying several petitions filed all over the country which should have been done as a matter of course was another factor which reflects Justice Thakur wanted to embarrass the government somehow or the other. He spoke the language of Congress/AAP.
Regard being had to the fact that Thakur's father was a Congressman and reasons for making such unwanted and unwarranted observations is not very difficult to fathom.
It is high time SC stops interfering in the policy matters of the government in power.
No comments:
Post a Comment