New Delhi: More than 600 lawyers, including senior advocate Harish Salve and Bar Council chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra, have written to the Chief Justice of India, alleging that a “vested interest group” is trying to put pressure on the judiciary and defame courts, especially in cases of corruption involving politicians.
“These tactics are damaging to our courts and threaten our democratic fabric,” the lawyers drawn from across the country said in the latter dated March 26. CJI Chandrachud’s leadership is crucial in these “tough times” and the apex court should stand strong, they said, adding it is not the time to maintain dignified silence.
The letter, shared by official sources, targeted a section of lawyers without naming them and alleged that they defend politicians by day and then try to influence judges through the media at night. This interest group creates false narratives of a supposed better past and golden period of courts, contrasting it with the happenings in the present, the letter said. It claimed that their comments are aimed at influencing courts and embarrassing them for political gains. Adish Aggarwala, Chetan Mittal, Pinky Anand, Hitesh Jain, Ujjwala Pawar, Uday Holla and Swarupama Chaturvedi are among the signatories to the letter titled “Judiciary Under Threat-Safeguarding Judiciary from Political and Professional Pressure”.
Though the lawyers behind the letter have mentioned no specific cases, the development comes at a time when courts are dealing with several high-profile criminal cases of corruption involving opposition leaders. Opposition parties have accused the central government of targeting their leaders due to its political vendetta, a charge refuted by the ruling BJP. These parties, whose ranks include some noted lawyers, have joined hands against the recent arrest of Delhi Chief Minister and AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal in the Delhi excise policy-linked money laundering case.
Targeting the critics, the signatories to the letter accused them of suggesting that courts in the past were easier to influence. This shakes the public’s trust in courts, they said.