“I am fighting against corruption not judiciary,” says Justice Karnan in SC

792
Justice CS Karnan. Photo: Twitter

After much theatrics and open defiance of SC orders to honour its summons, the Calcutta High Court judge, Justice CS Karnan, finally presented himself in the apex court on March 31.

However, there was no iota of remorse shown by the judge, who stood by his complaints made against 20 judges (both Supreme Court and high courts) earlier. When the bench wanted to know whether he would withdraw his complaints or apologise unconditionally, the judge reiterated that there was nothing illegal about airing them. Karnan, however, said that he would apologise only if the SC restored his judicial and administrative work.

But the top court did not agree and asked him to reply on its contempt notice within four weeks, in an affidavit. It also ruled that the controversial judge could not resume his administrative and judicial work. It asked him to appear on May 1, the next date of hearing.

While protesting against the SC stripping him of all administrative and judicial work, Karnan said that he was holding a constitutional post and his dignity had been hurt. Why was he not given a chance to explain before official work was taken away from him, Karnan asked the court, asserting that his fundamental rights had been violated. “I am not fighting for personal gain, I am fighting for general welfare. I can prove my case if the honourable court allows me.” He pointed out that he was only fighting against corruption in the judiciary and not the judiciary itself. “I am innocent, I have not done anything wrong,” the judge said.

Referring to the West Bengal director general of police coming to his house to serve the bailable warrant, Karnan said that as a result he suffered mental agony and felt insulted. It had also sullied the reputation of the judiciary, the judge complained.

As the court proceedings came to an end, Justice Karnan made it plain and clear that he would not appear in court the next time if he was not allowed to resume his judicial and administrative work and said that the court could send him to jail for contempt.

—India Legal Bureau