On October 2, 2108, Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra tenure concluded. 

No doubts, Justice Dipak Misra’s tenure will be always remembered for historic landmark judgments but his tenure will also be remembered for the controversies that have surrounded him at the top post of the apex court. Perhaps the most controversial tenure in the history of the supreme court of India.

The judgments passed by his bench will certainly rank him as a Chief Justice who vindicated the spirit of the Constitution through his pronouncements.

Justice Misra joined the Supreme Court bench in the year 2011. In the last eight years, firstly as a judge of the apex court of the country and then as the CJI, Justice Misra was associated with several landmark judgments during his tenure at the Supreme Court. He interpreted the Constitution to expand the scope of fundamental rights. Also, during his tenure as the CJI, four senior judges held a dramatic press conference, which was seen as a mutiny in the Indian judiciary, which has been famous for its brotherhood. Justice Misra’s 13-month tenure as the 45^th CJI, of which he assumed office on August 28, 2017 was cinematically eventful, adored by a series of landmark judgments, two unconventional midnight hearings at the Apex Court, differences with the government, rumors of him being nepotistic and an unprecedented press conference by four senior judges of the Supreme Court.

Here in this article we list the controversies surfaced around him and his landmark verdicts as follows:

Controversies

Outside his judicial functions, he dragged the supreme court into a period of chaos and earned the dubious distinction of being the first chief justice against whom an impeachment motion was attempted.

Within a month of Misra taking over as chief justice came what is now called the “medical colleges scam.” A first information report registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation on Sept. 19, 2017 claimed that attempts had been made to manipulate supreme court proceedings to obtain permissions in favour of a medical college run by the Lucknow-based Prasad Education Trust, and named former Odisha High Court judge IM Quddusi as an accused.

In October, activists moved petitions seeking an independent inquiry into the matter. On Nov. 9, the petitions were mentioned before a bench headed by justice J Chelameswar, who was then the second most senior judge, as Misra was presiding over a constitution bench. Chelameswar sought the formation of a five-judge bench to deal with the petitions.

The next day, following an order from a two-judge bench handling a similar petition, a constitution bench was quickly put together to nullify the orders of Chelameswar’s bench. In the process, the power of the chief justice as master of the roster was asserted. Later, the petitions were dismissed.

This resulted in Four senior judges of the supreme court who comprised the collegium at the time—Chelameswar, Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B Lokur, and Kurian Joseph—meeting the press in January and, in the process, laid out a series of questions on the functioning of the chief justice in assigning cases to particular benches.

“The administration of the supreme court is not in order,” the judges said at the press conference. The implication of the statement was clear. There was an attempt to fix benches and senior judges were being kept out of important cases. The independence of the judiciary was in peril.

In the interview, Justice Chelameswar was reported saying that “the administration of the Supreme Court is not in order and many things which are less than desirable have happened in the last few months. We owe a responsibility to the institution and the nation. Our efforts have failed in convincing CJI to take steps to protect the institution.”

After the press conference, several opposition party came forward to bring impeachment motion against Dipak Misra. The draft proposal has called Misra’s case as “abuse of authority to arbitrarily assign individual cases to select judges”, according to media reports.

Prasad Education Trust case: One of the cases under the radar is illegal gratification in the Prasad Education Trust case, according to News 18. The case pertains to accepting bribery by medical institutions for getting clearances to set up medical colleges. It has been alleged that Misra had submitted a false affidavit allowing the acquisition of lands to the institutions for building medical colleges.

Justice Loya’s death: Dipak Misra had allegedly refused SC judges’ petition, which demanded an independent probe against Loya’s death, according to the presser of the four senior SC judges.

The impeachment motion was later dismissed by Vice President.

Dipak Misra at the Independence Day function organised in the Supreme Court by the Supreme Court Bar Association, said that it was easy to criticise, attack and destroy a system but instead an endeavour should be made to transform and reform it. “There may be some elements who try to weaken the institution,” but the judiciary will refuse to succumb, Chief Justice Misra said in an apparent reference to discordant voices coming from within the top judiciary and outside.

After the storm of the press conference and impeachment motion, the focus was back on the judicial functions of the chief justice. Despite the protests of the four judges, they continued to be kept off important cases.

Important Judgments by his Bench

Online FIRs

In case of Own Motion vs. State, Justice Misra passed an order directing the Delhi Police to upload the FIRs on the website within 24 hours of their lodging.

Reservation in Promotions case

In another case concerning reservation, Justice Misra and Justice Dalveer Bhandari rejected decision of the Uttar Pradesh government to give reservations in the promotions.

National Anthem case

Justice Misra bench of the Supreme Court had made playing the national anthem in cinema halls mandatory in 2016. However, Justice Dipak Misra-headed bench amended the national anthem ruling twice making it optional to play and stand during the national anthem in the cinema halls.

Right to Reputation case

Hearing petitions filed by a few politicians including Rahul Gandhi from Indian National Congress, Arvind Kejriwal of Aam Aadmi Party and Subramanian Swamy of Bhartiya Janta Party in May 2017, Justice Dipak Misra held reputation of a person could not be allowed to be crucified at the altar of the other’s right of free speech. Justice Dipak Misra ruled, “The right to reputation is a constituent of Article 21 of the Constitution. It is an individual’s fundamental right.” The bench upheld the 156-year-old defamation law. Interestingly in this case top criminal lawyer and father of Hon’ble Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Mr. U.R. Lalit was appearing as a defense attorney of Rahul Gandhi. However, Justice Misra did not recognize the senior Lalit and went on to inquire about his practice in criminal law.

The 377 verdict

In one of its most celebrated verdicts, Supreme Court declared Section 377 of the IPC as unconstitutional. Section 377 made gay sex a criminal offence with a provision for jail term up to five years. With this, India is now one of the 26 counties were homosexuality is legal.

Adultery Judgment

Last week started with the bench of Supreme Court led by CJI Misra holding Section 497 of the IPC as unconstitutional. Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code deals with Adultery.

Aadhaar Judgment

With a difference of opinion to the Central Government, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Aadhaar. The Supreme Court held the constitutionality of Aadhaar but ruled that the UIDAI project could not be made mandatory for any social welfare scheme and availing rights.

On Sabrimala issue

CJI Dipak Misra-led bench said that women of all age are allowed to under the Constitution to enter Sabarimala Temple. Justice Dipak Misra held that religion is a way of life that is meant to link life with dignity.

Can elected representatives practice Law

A PIL was filed by BJP Leader and Sr. Advocate Ashwani Kumar demanding ban on the practice of lawyers who are elected as a MLA/MP or a Minister. The bench led by Justice Misra held that as the profession of an elected representative does not fall within the rule 49 of the Bar Council of India Rules, lawmakers (with a law degree) can practice law as a profession.

Supreme Court Live

The Justice Misra led bench also held that there would be live telecast of the cases involving national and international importance. The bench held that live streaming of the Supreme Court proceedings would bring transparency and accountability to the judicial process and was a step to be taken in public interest.

RamJanmbhoomi-Babri Masjid case(Ayodhya)

A three judge bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, by a majority of 2:1 declined to set up a larger bench for a relook of its 1994 verdict which held a “mosque is not an essential part of the practice of Islam”. The apex court will now hear the main Ayodhya title suit from October 29.

Hadiya Case

A 24 year old girl from Kerala married a boy from another religious group and the Kerala High Court invalidated the marriage. In the order authored by CJI Misra set aside the impugned judgment, while allowing continuation of the NIA probe.

Khap Panchayat Case

In this case Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the right to choose life partner is fundamental right, consent of family, community, clan not necessary for marriage between two adults.

The Euthanasia Case

Constitution Bench of Supreme Court of India led by Justice Misra has held that right to die with dignity is a fundamental right. The Bench also held that passive euthanasia and a living will also legally valid. The Court has issued detailed guidelines in this regard.

Meesha Case

Supreme Court bench led by Justice Misra dismissed a petition seeking ban on a Malayalam novel “Meesha” which is about a woman who stood up against caste based practices of worships.

AAP vs. Delhi LG case

In the controversy over who is going to rule Delhi, the Supreme Court led by Justice Misra held that constitutional morality should guide governance and to work in accordance with the rules.

The Midnight hearings

Yakoob Menon death sentence case and the case of Karnataka government formation were the two occasions where Justice Misra was kind enough to allow midnight proceedings to ensure justice is done.

Also Read: The towering and landmark judgments concluded during the tenure of Justice Dipak Misra

Justice Misra shall be remembered as a Judge who has led India into a new era by striking down erstwhile laws and hindrances in the way of fundamental rights and has always acted as a warrior to strengthen the judicial system of India but his tenure will also be remembered for the controversies that have surrounded him at the top post of the apex court. Perhaps the most controversial tenure in the history of the supreme court of India.