Supreme Court Collegium’s Landmark Reiterations Show It Is No Longer Pusillanimous
Live LawOn Thursday, the Supreme Court’s three-member Collegium - comprising the Chief Justice of India, D.Y.Chandrachud and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and K.M.Joseph - responsible for recommending suitable names for elevation as the High Court Judges, reiterated certain names recommended by it earlier, for elevation to various High Courts. The reiteration of recommendation to elevate senior advocate Saurabh Kirpal as a Judge of the Delhi High Court is a succinct articulation of what discrimination on the ground of one’s sexual orientation could entail. The resolution further quotes the Law Minister as having stated that the candidate’s “ardent involvement and passionate attachment to the cause of gay-rights” would not rule out the possibility of bias and prejudice.” It needs to be asked, if in the U.S. Supreme Court, where the political allegiance of each of the nine Judges is well-known by virtue of which President had appointed them, two conservative Judges -whose political masters had shown no clear sympathy for LGBTQI rights in the past - could take a dispassionate view in Bostock and tilt the scales in favour of their rights, is there a justification for the Law Minister’s apprehension that Kirpal’s judicial decisions might suffer from bias and prejudice? Somasekhar Sundaresan, R.John Sathyan and Justice Krishna Iyer The Collegium’s reiteration of its recommendation to elevate Somasekhar Sundaresan as a Judge of the Bombay High Court makes it clear that the views on social media attributed to him, do not furnish any foundation to infer that he is biased.