Source:-\u00a0scoopwhoop.com<\/p>\n
Days after being slapped with a contempt notice from the Supreme Court, Calcutta High Court Justice C S Karnan has written a strongly worded letter to Chief Justice of India stating that his case should be sent to the Parliament. He’s contended that the case is “not sustainable”.<\/p>\n
He has also played the Dalit card in the case, accusing the CJI J S Khehar-led seven-judge bench of upper caste judges misusing their powers to victimise a Dalit judge.<\/p>\n
Notably, this is for the first time that contempt of court proceedings have been issues against a sitting judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court.<\/p>\n
What are Karnan’s allegations?<\/strong><\/p>\n As a response to the February 8 order of the seven-judge bench asking Karnan to appear in person before it on February 13 to explain as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him, Karnan has written a letter addressed to Registrar General of the apex court.<\/p>\n Karnan’s letter, as per TOI, says: “The suo motu order against me, a Dalit judge, is unethical and goes against the SC and ST (Prevention of) Atrocities Act. It is certainly a national issue and a wise decision would be to refer the issue to the House of Parliament.”<\/p>\n Karnan’s letter further says, “Before obtaining any explanation from me, I wish to state that the Courts have no power to enforce punishment against a sitting judge of the High Court. The said order does not conform to logic, therefore it is not suitable for execution.”<\/p>\n Karnan is accused of leveling multiple unsubstantiated allegations against Madras HC chief justice and other fellow judges. You can read all the charges against him here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Why is it important?<\/strong><\/p>\n By doing this, Karnan has directly confronted the SC. The case, which was already the talk of the town because it was the first time that contempt proceedings were initiated against a sitting judge, has just got more complicated with this.<\/p>\n Constitutionally, a judge of the Supreme Court or High Court can only be sacked through a removal motion passed by a two-third majority in each house of the Parliament. There has been no such sacking by Parliament till date though the removal motion has been initiated thrice.<\/p>\n What next?<\/strong><\/p>\n While the response from the SC is awaited, the letter indicates that Karnan might not present himself before the SC bench on February 13.<\/p>\n