<p dir="auto">The Supreme Court on Monday rejected advocate Prashant Bhushan's bid to rake up four senior-most judges press conference of January 12, 2018, to justify his allegations against sitting and retired judges.</p>.<p dir="auto">"We hope it was the first and the last occasion that the judges have gone to press, and God gives the wisdom to protect its dignity by an internal mechanism, particularly, when allegations made, if any, publicly cannot be met by sufferer judges. It would cause suffering to them till eternity," a three-judge bench presided over by Justice Arun Mishra said.</p>.<p dir="auto">Justice Mishra was himself in the eye of a storm after the press conference where four senior-most judges, including Justice Ranjan Gogoi, aired their concern for posting sensitive cases to particular benches. Justice Gogoi cited the instance of Mumbai judge, B H Loya's death case before a bench led by Justice Mishra, who subsequently withdrew from the case.</p>.<p dir="auto">In its judgement giving Re one as fine to Bhushan, the court said truth can be the defence to the judges also, but they are bound by their judicial norms, ethics, and code of conduct. </p>.<p dir="auto">Similarly, the code of conduct for advocates is equally applicable to the lawyers also, being part of the system, the court added. </p>.<p dir="auto">"The judges have to express their opinion by their judgements, and they cannot enter into public debate or go to press. It is very easy to make any allegation against them. Judges have to be the silent sufferer of such allegations, and they cannot counter such allegations publicly by going on public platforms, newspapers or media," the bench said.</p>.<p dir="auto">The court said if a scathing attack is made on the judges, it would become difficult for them to work fearlessly and with the objectivity of approach to the issues. The judgment can be criticized. However, motives to the Judges need not be attributed, as it brings the administration of justice into disrepute. </p>.<p dir="auto">Similarly, retired judges also had a right to live with dignity and they were not supposed to be answering each and every allegations and enter into public debate, it said.</p>
<p dir="auto">The Supreme Court on Monday rejected advocate Prashant Bhushan's bid to rake up four senior-most judges press conference of January 12, 2018, to justify his allegations against sitting and retired judges.</p>.<p dir="auto">"We hope it was the first and the last occasion that the judges have gone to press, and God gives the wisdom to protect its dignity by an internal mechanism, particularly, when allegations made, if any, publicly cannot be met by sufferer judges. It would cause suffering to them till eternity," a three-judge bench presided over by Justice Arun Mishra said.</p>.<p dir="auto">Justice Mishra was himself in the eye of a storm after the press conference where four senior-most judges, including Justice Ranjan Gogoi, aired their concern for posting sensitive cases to particular benches. Justice Gogoi cited the instance of Mumbai judge, B H Loya's death case before a bench led by Justice Mishra, who subsequently withdrew from the case.</p>.<p dir="auto">In its judgement giving Re one as fine to Bhushan, the court said truth can be the defence to the judges also, but they are bound by their judicial norms, ethics, and code of conduct. </p>.<p dir="auto">Similarly, the code of conduct for advocates is equally applicable to the lawyers also, being part of the system, the court added. </p>.<p dir="auto">"The judges have to express their opinion by their judgements, and they cannot enter into public debate or go to press. It is very easy to make any allegation against them. Judges have to be the silent sufferer of such allegations, and they cannot counter such allegations publicly by going on public platforms, newspapers or media," the bench said.</p>.<p dir="auto">The court said if a scathing attack is made on the judges, it would become difficult for them to work fearlessly and with the objectivity of approach to the issues. The judgment can be criticized. However, motives to the Judges need not be attributed, as it brings the administration of justice into disrepute. </p>.<p dir="auto">Similarly, retired judges also had a right to live with dignity and they were not supposed to be answering each and every allegations and enter into public debate, it said.</p>
