BM_discussion http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion?hl=en
BM_discussion@googlegroups.com Today's topics: * Fwd: A Critic is a Friend Of The Court, a Amicus Curie...... - 1 messages, 1 author http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/0465e4cd8425fe51?hl=en ============================================================================== TOPIC: Fwd: A Critic is a Friend Of The Court, a Amicus Curie...... http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/browse_thread/thread/0465e4cd8425fe51?hl=en ============================================================================== == 1 of 1 == Date: Fri, Aug 10 2007 11:57 am From: "Sundeep Jalan" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sundeep Jalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Aug 11, 2007 12:09 AM Subject: The Critics are Certainly a Friend Of The Court, a Amicus Curie...... To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] *A Critic is a Friend Of The Court* ============================================= I start with the presumption that a Person who seeks to publicly criticize any Judicial action or inaction invariably requires a pack of Courage, Conviction and Complete faith in his so critical stand. Ordinarily, a person publicly critical of any Judicial action or inaction doesn't do so to malign or scandalize any Judge or Judiciary, or out of sheer fancy, or to gain cheap publicity and On the Contrary he is the One who is concerned and well wisher of the Judge and the Judiciary. He is the One who wants the Person or the System to be corrected. In Fact, it is no exaggeration if I were to say that he is the One who wants the dignity of the Justice System be protected. I may not be Publicly critical of a Judicial action or inaction if I am little interested in the dignity or indignity of the Judiciary but such is the case where I am interested. One who criticizes has a profound interest in the well being of the criticized. The criticism seeks to alarm the Judges that something is seriously wrong there and failure to take corrective measures may occasion miscarriage of Justice and may bring disrepute to the Justice System. The inherent objective and purpose of criticism is not to malign but to ensure that a person loaded with discretionary powers exercises the same not only in accordance of law but also see that it is socially just and reasonable. *The Judicial dignity and Rule of Law in the society go in tandem.* They are inalienable. The Judicial dignity consists in We the People getting Constitutional *"Preamble Justice".* If at all the Judges are so concerned and passionate about Judicial dignity, why are they not disturbed, sleepless and responsive at the premise where millions of childrens are malnourished, starving and dying, innocent childrens are forced to beg by begging mafias, childrens living on the footpath, Farmers committing suicides, millions of people displaced and never rehabilitated, in the name of development. Why it doesn't shocks the conscience of the Judges by the fact that millions of people still do not have access to clean drinking water and are forced to do toilets in the open. Why it doesn't shock the conscience of the Judges by the fact that millions of Childrens and women are trafficked for prostitution. Is it suffice that Orders are passed, on deaf ears of the State, without being follow up of their implementation. Doesn't the Judiciary has powers to monitor implementation of Orders passed by itself. And the State leadership get away Judges momentary fury with customary strictures and criticism, caution and advice, or are branded callous or worse. The Judicial dignity is an illusion for those victim of State's omnipresent perils of Corruption and the Judges failure to arrest the same. The Judicial dignity shall occasion, by default, where the People stop laughing at the premise of threat of legal action. It takes years and decades for a case to be disposed off and Undertrial prisoners spent valuable years of their life because the State doesn't has the adequate nos. of prosecutors. Where is the dignity. Can the Judicial dignity be seprated from individual dignity. It is pertinent to mention here of a very recent case where a learned Counsel in a PIL case appearing for the Respondent Minister argued before the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court that though the Respondent Minister has awarded the tender without following the due process of law, causing a loss of revenue to the State exchequer, he(the minister) had no malafide intentions. The Counsel seeks to suggest that principle enshrined in the Constitution under Article 19(1)(b) that "Citizen can assemble peaceably and without arms" is flawed and Citizens can assemble peaceably with arms. If the Judges are willing to buy these arguments than the intentions of the Critics shouldn't be suspected. The ultimate Judicial dignity lies in People getting "Preamble Justice", or else the Judges may seek illusory, cosmetic and customary dignity. Sandeep Bharat. ------------------------------ DELETE button is history. Unlimited mail storage is just a click away.<http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_mail_6/*https://edit.india.yahoo.com/config/eval_register> ============================================================================== You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BM_discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to BM_discussion@googlegroups.com or visit http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion?hl=en To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change the way you get mail from this group, visit: http://groups.google.com/group/BM_discussion/subscribe?hl=en To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ============================================================================== Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en
