Mahua Moitra
By Justice Katju
I had written an article calling former Chief Justice of India Chandrachud a rank careerist, who was unwilling to give an honest judgment where he felt his chances of becoming the CJI may be jeopardized, and perfectly willing to give a dishonest judgment to ensure his chances.
I particularly mentioned his observation in the Gyanvapi mosque case which has opened up a Pandora’s box, and increased communalism exponentially in India, benefiting the BJP which thrives on it,
https://www.punjabtodaynews.com/the-crass-dishonesty-of-former-cji-chandrachud
The well known Member of the Indian Parliament, Mahua Moitra, tweeted this in response to my article :
” Well said sir. But all of you are very active once he has retired. We heard only silence or praise from his colleagues while he was in office “.
I regret to say this, but Mahua has been uncharitable to me. I have been criticizing Chandrachud for long, even when he was a sitting Judge, whose only single aim was to become the CJI by hook or crook ( like his father YV Chandrachud who gave a dishonest judgment in the ADM Jabalpur vs Shivakant Shukla case to ensure his becoming CJI ).
I wrote this article in the portal thewire.in and elsewhere in November 2019 ie five years before Chandrachud retired in 2024.
The Ayodhya verdict was the blackest judgment in Indian judicial history ( along with the ADM Jabalpur verdict). It sanctified the illegal demolition of the Babri Masjid, and this demolition was, in my opinion, the greatest tragedy in Indian history along with the Partition of India in 1947, tending to tear apart India’s social fabric
Although the Ayodhya verdict does not make it clear which of the 5 judges on the bench wrote it, it becomes evident that Chandrachud wrote it, since he himself stated later that he asked God what judgment he should write.
So Mahua Moitra is not right when she says in her tweet ” We heard only silence or praise from his colleagues while he was in office “. I was repeatedly criticizing Chandrachud while he was in office.
I had criticised Chandrachud when he was in office for not saying in a case regarding the Gyanvapi mosque which came before him that the suit regarding the Gyanvapi mosque was not maintainable as it was barred by the Places of Worship Act, 1991, and in a later case holding that despite the POW Act ( which prohibits change of the nature of a religious structure as it stood on 15.8.1947 ) the court can enquire into its history ( which enabled surveys, which could be a precursor to it’s demolition by a fanatic mob, as it happened to Babri Masjid, and can happen to the Shahi Masjid in Mathura, the Jama Masjid in Sambhal, the Ajmer Sharif dargah, and countless other masjid and dargahs).
I also often criticized Chandrachud in my fb posts when he was in office that he talks too much, both inside and outside court, despite the oft quoted dictum of former Lord Chancellor of England, Sir Francis Bacon, that ” A much talking judge is like an ill tuned cymbal “.
He liked to be always in the limelight ( when a judge should be reclusive and avoid publicity). One way he would do this was picking up high publicity cases suo motu and list them before himself e.g. the Kolkata case of the rape cum murder of a lady doctor, which was unnecessary and totally uncalled for, as I mentioned in my interview by Kapil Sibal
While he was CJI, and even before that, almost every second or third evening Chandrachud would go to some function or gathering to give lectures etc, ( which could be seen on YouTube) instead of sitting at home, which judges should do in the evenings, reading books, watching TV, reading the next day’s files, etc. I said this when he was in office, not just after his retirement,
So to say that I only criticized Chandrachud after his retirement is not correct. Mahua Moitra should check her facts before making a statement
