Prayer: I am not sure what to do.
Justice Yashwant Verma, who was shifted from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court amid cash-at-hom allegations, was sworn in in a “Clandstine” manner on Saturday, claiming the move by the High Court Bar Association (HCBA).
The bodies of the lawyers, who had opposed the refraction of the judge, questioned that “the bars were not informed” and alleged that it had once again eradicated the trust of the people in the judicial system.
An in-house probe was ordered by the Chief Justice of India (CJI), which was after the recovery of “four to five semi-sacks” of Indian currency notes from Justice Verma’s residence after an incident last month. Justice Verma has said that neither he nor his family knew about the money.
In a letter on 5 April, HCBA, Allahabad, Secretary of Vikrant Pandey, Arun Bhansali, Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, was addressed, said that “legally and traditionally, the oath given to Justice Verma is impure and unacceptable” and the main justice was not found to assign any administrative and judicial work.
The letter stated, “The entire bar association hurts to know about the cladstine method in which Justice Yashwant Verma is administered the oath of his office in Allahabad.”
“Justice Yashwant Verma was met by the Bar members of the bar and assured that appropriate steps would be taken to maintain the dignity of the judicial system,” Mr. Pandey said.
He said, “We are given to understand that the system is taking every step in a fair and transparent manner, but why this oath is not informed, there is a question that again erased people’s faith in the judicial system,” he said in the letter.
“We unevenly condemn the way in which Nyaya Yashwant Verma was administered the oath behind our back,” he said.
There was no official word from the High Court on the swearing in of the judge.
The cash recovery incident has trusted a debate on the issue of judicial accountability and has been called from various quarters for strict action in the case to restore an example and trust in the judiciary.
Mr. Pandey said that “the membership of the oath has been traditionally held and consistently held in the open court”.
He said, “The lawyer can end our faith in this institution without thinking.
“Furthermore, we have been given to understand that most of the honorable judges were also not invited/informed above. Thus, legally and traditionally, the oath given to Nyaya Verma is bird’s ingredient/unacceptable.
Mr. Pandey said in the letter, “We once again condemn the aforesaid incidents and request the Hon’ble Chief Justice not to hand over any administrative and judicial work to Justice Yashwant Verma.”
Mr. Pandey said that the administration of the oath of a judge is a superior incident in the judicial system. “The lawyers cannot be kept away as the same stakeholder in the institution. The High Court Bar Association passed a resolution stating that this oath is against the Constitution of India and hence, the members of the association do not want to be associated with the unconstitutional oath.” “What we solved, we spoke openly and not only this, we also sent a copy of proposals to everyone, including your Lordship. Thus, we failed to understand what is ‘Clandstine’ in this oath,” Mr. Pandey said.
(Except for the headline, the story has not been edited by NDTV employees and is published by a syndicated feed.)
