The painfully protracted saga of P.D. Dinakaran is becoming more embarrassing by the day with the Karnataka Chief Justice's brazen and continuing defiance of judicial propriety. His refusal to go on leave, as recently advised by the Supreme Court collegium, has exposed the powerlessness of this body, headed by the Chief Justice of India, and further dented the image of the higher judiciary. It was in the face of such recalcitrance that the ill-considered proposal to transfer him as Chief Justice of the Sikkim High Court was mooted. While the collegium evidently saw a transfer to what is the smallest High Court in the country as a form of punishment, it failed to ask the obvious question: if Justice Dinakaran, who faces charges of corruption and land-grab, is unfit for Karnataka, how can he be suitable for Sikkim or, for that matter, any other State? This is exactly what the Sikkim Bar Association was asking during its protests, which eventually torpedoed the transfer proposal. Rather than resign in the face of a total lack of public confidence in his reputation, Justice Dinakaran has decided to brazen it out. At one level, his refusal to go on leave exposes the limitations of the collegium. While this panel has the power to recommend the appointment, transfer, and elevation of judges, it does not have the authority to compel a judge to proceed on leave. This lacuna draws attention to the urgent need for a quick and effective statutory mechanism to remove errant judges, now governed by the cumbersome and time-consuming process of impeachment.
The impeachment process is so unwieldy that judges could be tempted to remain in office and ride it out. This is exactly what Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court is doing. It was two years ago that impeachment proceedings were kick-started against him on the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India following allegations of financial misappropriation, but the matter is still at the inquiry stage. Impeachment proceedings have also been initiated against Justice Dinakaran but it is far from certain when or whether the various steps required under the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968 will be taken before the matter comes up finally for vote in Parliament. In the only instance when an impeachment motion against a judge was voted upon by Parliament — in 1993, when Justice V. Ramaswami was in the dock — it was defeated. Justice Dinakaran's continuing defiance underlines the importance of seriously pursuing the proposed Judges Standards and Accountability Bill, which promises to strengthen judicial accountability by introducing a more efficient mechanism to govern the removal of errant judges.
