Team Clarion
NEW DELHI – Sharply criticising the Allahabad High Court’s sitting judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav for attending a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) event in Prayagraj, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) chief Asaduddin Owaisi wondered how could the country’s minorities expect justice from such judges.
Justice Yadav participated in an event on Sunday organised by the Hindutva group and made inflammatory remarks targeting Muslims. The VHP, a right-wing group, is an offshoot of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological mentor of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Reacting to Justice Yadav’s speeches, Owaisi posted on X, “The VHP was banned on various occasions. It is associated with RSS, an organisation that Vallabhbhai Patel banned for being a ‘force of hate and violence.’ It is unfortunate that a high court judge attended the conference of such an organisation. This “speech” can be easily rebutted, but it’s more important to remind your honour that the Constitution of India expects judicial independence and impartiality.”
The Hyderabad MP added, “The Constitution of India is not majoritarian but a democratic one. In a democracy, the minority’s rights are protected.”
Justice Yadav’s remarks, Owaisi stated, were an “indictment” of the collegium system of judges’ appointment and “raises questions” on the judiciary’s impartiality.
“How can a minority party expect justice before someone who participates in VHP’s programs?’ the AIMIM leader asked.
Addressing a convention of the VHP’s legal cell in Prayagraj (formerly Allahabad) on the Uniform Civil Code, Justice Yadav said, “I have no hesitation in saying that this is Hindustan (India), this country would function as per the wishes of the majority (i.e. the Hindus). This is the law. You can’t say that ‘you (Justice Yadav) are saying this despite being a high court judge.’ The law works according to the majority.”
Using the derogatory term ‘Kathmulla’ for Muslims, he “Those that I am talking about, not all are bad. But those who you can call ‘kathmullas’…I know the word is objectionable but I have no hesitation in saying this because they are fatal to the country. They are people who incite the public and the ones who prevent the country from progressing. Such people need to be cautious of”.
Owaisi slammed the sitting judge for using derogatory terms and reminded him of “The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life”.
“A High Court judge used the word ‘kathmulla’ and set down conditions for Muslims in India (as if we need his permission). Just some reminders from the ‘Restatement of Values of Judicial Life’ (1997),” said the Hyderabad MP while highlighting three values of Judicial Life.
1. Justice must not merely be done but it must also be seen to be done. The behaviour and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must reaffirm the people’s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary. Accordingly, any act of a judge of the Supreme Court or a high court, whether in official or personal capacity, which erodes the credibility of this perception, has to be avoided.
2. A judge shall not enter into public debate or express his views in public on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely to arise for judicial determination.
3. Every judge must at all times be conscious that he is under the public gaze and there should be no act or omission by him which is unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in which that office is held.
