A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud famous that Karnataka High Court judge Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda, who had made these observations, had on September 21 tendered an apology for his comments within the open court docket there.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday closed suo motu proceedings initiated over alleged objectionable comments made by a Karnataka High Court judge throughout court docket proceedings.
A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud famous that Karnataka High Court judge Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda, who had made these observations, had on September 21 tendered an apology for his comments within the open court docket there.
“We can’t call any part of the territory of India as Pakistan,” the CJI noticed.
The bench, additionally comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, Surya Kant, and Hrishikesh Roy, noticed that courts should watch out to not make comments in the midst of judicial proceedings which can be construed as being misogynistic or for that matter prejudicial to any phase of the society.
“Casual observations may well reflect a certain degree of individual bias particularly when they are likely to be perceived as being directed to a particular gender or community,” the bench stated.
The prime court docket had on September 20 taken suo motu cognisance of the excessive court docket judge’s alleged objectionable comments in opposition to a lady lawyer through the court docket proceedings in a case and his reference to a Muslim-majority space in Bengaluru as “Pakistan” in one other.
In video clips, which went viral on social media, Justice Srishananda was seen reprimanding a lady lawyer and reportedly made some objectionable comments when she intervened in an ongoing listening to.
The judge, in one other case associated to a landlord-tenant dispute, referred to a Muslim-dominated locality in Bengaluru as “Pakistan”.
“At this stage, we request the Registrar General of the High Court of Karnataka to submit a report to this court after seeking administrative directions of the Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka, in regard to the subject matter which has been referred to above,” the apex court docket had stated on September 20.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by DNA workers and is printed from PTI)
READ | ‘Not one thing that…’: Omar Abdullah slams Centre for inviting overseas delegates to watch J-Okay polls
