The Supreme Court has stayed the proceedings of West Bengal’s Justice Madan B. Lokur Commission of Inquiry into the Pegasus allegations.
The reason for the stay is ostensibly because the apex court is seized of the case and has itself formed an expert technical committee overseen by former apex court judge, Justice R.V. Raveendran, to examine allegations that the Centre used Israeli software, Pegasus, to spy on citizens.
The Justice Raveendran Committee was formed by the court in October to ensure “absolute transparency and efficiency”. The court had asked the committee to submit its report “expeditiously” and posted the next hearing after eight weeks. The case may come up again post the Christmas vacations.
But committees formed by the court in the past in an earnest effort to uncover the truth or to broker peace have had mixed results.
Take the case of an October 2020 order of the court in the stubble-burning case. The court formed a one-man committee of Justice Lokur to protect Delhi NCR from air pollution caused by stubble burning in the neighbouring states of Uttar Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana. The court said Justice Lokur would be helped by student volunteer forces deployed from the National Cadet Corps, National Service Scheme and Bharat Scouts and Guides.
But the order came to nothing and was put on hold by the court itself when the Centre promulgated the Commission for Air Quality Management in the National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas Ordinance of 2020.
Again, the court, with best intentions in mind, formed a four-member committee of experts “to listen to the grievances of the farmers on the farm laws and the views of the government and make recommendations”.
At one point in the 11-page order of January 2021, the three-judge Bench led by then Chief Justice of India Sharad A. Bobde had expressed the hope that the committee “may create a congenial atmosphere and improve the trust and confidence of the farmers”. It was reported that the committee gave its report.
Meanwhile, the government repealed the three controversial farm laws and the protesting farmers have headed home. Recently, one of the members of the committee, Anil Ghanwat, told the media that he had written to the CJI to make the committee report public. Mr. Ghanwat said the report could play a certain “educational role”.
Under wraps is also the report by former Supreme Court judge, Justice A.K. Patnaik, on the existence of a “larger conspiracy” against the judiciary and former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, presently a parliamentarian and author.
Though the court said such a conspiracy cannot be “completely ruled out”, it chose to close the suo motu case titled ‘In re: Matter of great public importance touching upon the independence of judiciary’ registered in 2019. It said it would be difficult to retrieve the electronic evidence to establish conspiracy now. The court ordered Justice Patnaik’s report to be “placed back in a sealed cover”.
In yet another case, the apex court had to reject a plea to disband its inquiry commission chaired by former Supreme Court judge, Justice B.S. Chauhan. This commission was tasked by the court to look into allegations of Uttar Pradesh Police’s encounter with history-sheeter Vikas Dubey. A Mumbai-based advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay contested the court’s choice of the commission. Mr. Upadhyay had referred to articles published about relatives of Justice Chauhan being part of the ruling BJP in the State. But the court stood firm, not allowing a shadow of doubt to cross its choice of Justice Chauhan for the job.
The past months had seen Supreme Court’s Justice V.S. Sirpurkar Commission repeatedly seek extensions because of the pandemic to complete its probe into the deaths of four men, accused of the gang-rape and murder of a veterinarian, in an alleged encounter with the Hyderabad Police on December 6, 2019.
In the Ramjanmabhumi dispute case, the constitution of a mediation committee to talk with the parties did not stop adversarial litigation in court and the final judgment in favour of the Hindus.
