Once again in the limelight, Justice Surya Kant, current Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, is in this case because of his probable promotion to the Supreme Court of India. What stands behind this promotion is a trail of unanswered questions, serious allegations, and silence on the part of the administration. Justice Kant has been accused of corruption, benami property dealings and tax evasion in more than a decade but his career graph has continued to rise only.
For advertisement on our platform, do call at +91 6377460764 or email us at [email protected].
Almost four months into the tenure of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi at the Supreme Court, there was the same obscurity in the system of judicial appointments that characterized the earlier dispensations. Even the collegium of justice Gogoi who makes the decisions about the appointments and transfers of judges had already cast an eye at raising eyebrows by promoting judges with questionable pasts. The name of Justice Surya Kant was one of them. Allegations although still grave, indicated that the collegium was on course to recommend him to be elevated into the pinnacle court.
The career of justice Kant started in the year 1984 in Hisar, Haryana where he began his legal studies. He joined as the Advocate General of Haryana in 2000 and was promoted as a judge of the Haryana and Punjab High Court. His first name was however brought to question in 2012 when a real estate agent called Satish Kumar Jain alleged that he was facilitating illegal property deals worth few crores. Jain claimed that Kant underestimated valuation of properties in formal sales transactions to evade paying taxes and stamp duties, but the actual one was paid in huge cash installments.
Jain had forwarded his complaint to the Chief Justice of India at the time, SH Kapadia, accompanied by transactions and sale deeds. His first request by the Supreme Court registry was to prove his claims by an affidavit which he did within one week. Jain, in his sworn affidavit, elaborated on the way he assisted Justice Kant to buy and sell several properties in Chandigarh, Panchkuala and Delhi at very low prices compared to their real market prices.
One of the most outrageous allegations was made by a farmhouse in Kumarhatti, Himachal Pradesh that was sold at 13 lakh on paper, yet the true price was estimated at 2.32 crore. Jain alleged that he had paid the rest 2.20 crore in cash to the judge. In yet another one, a residential piece of land in Panchkula was purchased at an official price of 1.5 crore but Jain asserted a sale price of 3.1 crore. Jain also claimed that the wife of Kant paid 2 crores and 20 lakhs in cash to the BJP politician Diya Kumari in buying a house in Greater Kailash in the capital of Delhi.
Jain alleged that these transactions were understated to evade taxes of 7.63 crore. He accused Kant of being a property dealer, playing around with the property prices, and concealing property through benami ownership. Although such serious charges were made, the government and the Supreme Court did not order any official investigation. Justice Kant still served in the Punjab and Haryana high court without any formal investigation into the case.
Another complaint or report was received in 2017 within the Patiala jail of Punjab. Justice Kant was accused by a prisoner known as Surjit Singh of accepting bribes to bail out drug related offenders under NDPS act. Singh asserted that these deals were made through the connection of Kant by the relatives and two lawyers. He tabled eight particular instances in which bail was supposedly made on money security. These accusations painted a very dark picture considering that the drug crisis in Punjab is a serious one.
Justice Kant did not seem to slow his career down even after these multiple allegations. In October 2018, he was made the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. His appointment further led to controversy since he was appointed above Justice AK Mittal who was a senior judge in the same high court. Justice AK Goel, who was sitting on Supreme Court, openly dissented with the decision of the collegium and wrote to Chief Justice Dipak Misra, saying that the grievances against Kant should just be duly referenced and before any promotion happened, he should have been duly considered.
In a letter written by the Justice Goel, the Supreme Court was found to have been informed in details of corruption, underestimation of property and prejudice towards caste in the appointment of judges by Kant. He requested that the collegium have Kant assets and more especially the Greater Kailash property valued independently. However, the issues raised by Goel were apparently overlooked. The collegium proceeded to approve Kant, merely saying that it had taken into account all the pertinent factors.
There was more suspicion concerning the timing of the appointment of Kant. His file was reportedly pending with the government months before finally being cleared the very day Justice Gogoi assumed the Chief Justice of India. According to many insiders, the close relations between Gogoi and Kant that started when they were in Chandigarh might have contributed towards pushing the decision through.
Even after these unresolved allegations, two former judge of the Supreme Court would then go ahead to inform reporters that even with these unresolved claims, the name of Kant was still most likely to be submitted to be advanced to the Supreme Court. Justice Surya Kant would later in his life become the Chief Justice of India serving a term of 15 months in case the approval was passed.
All this episode reveals the serious flaws in judicial system of appointment in India. Whereas subordinate officials and citizens are ruthlessly dealt with under much more minor charges, the top ranks of the judicial system appear to be enjoying an alarming amount of protection. The accusations that were leveled against Justice Kant are stored in confidential files and were never exposed to any open inquiry and examination.
The case of justice Surya Kant points out the necessity of transparency and accountability at the judicial system. When the people lose trust in justice because those they expect to enforce the law do it without any checks. Once the collegium system was designed to protect the independence of the judiciary, it is on the verge of becoming a weapon to protect the influential.
Justice Kant, at least, in the present day, rides high, unscandalized and unmoved in a question. However, questions about his integrity have their dark shadows and this casts India judicial institutions in question.
