My father was never part of RSS: Justice Oka on Collegium propriety and judicial independence [Part I]

J Oka:  Factually, I must correct you. My father was alive till 2017. I became a judge in 2003. From my childhood, I have not seen him attending any RSS shakha. At most, he may have been associated one of one or two trust with which RSS may have been associated. So, I don’t think that anybody can say that he was a member of RSS…

…secondly, before you are appointed a judge, you deal with various cases. Now, as a lawyer, I must have appeared for almost all political parties…as a lawyer, I don’t think we are concerned with any philosophy and the kind of practice which was there in Bombay High Court and the time which we are required to devote to the work, it was impossible for at least me to do anything except practice.

When you become a judge, you are a completely different person, you take oath under the Constitution…to uphold ideals. When you sit as a judge, you look at the case, there’s a law laid down about bail…it is your duty to uphold Article 21 – liberty is the most important thing – or freedom of speech and expression…

…In the case of a bail, you may feel that this is a very heinous offence. But you don’t get influenced by that. Ultimately, there are parameters laid down for grant of bail, whether case is made out for or not. For example, if the offence is under UAPA, those stringent conditions (for bail) may not have been fulfilled. But if there is long incarceration and trial is not likely to start, the law is very clear: then you must give benefit of Article 21, release him. Your personal inclinations cannot and should not influence your role as a judge.

I’ll give you one example. We consider Justice Krishna Iyer as one of our greatest judges. No doubt, even his orders were criticised. His order granting stay in Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s election petition was criticised. But we can’t forget that he was an active member in politics; he was a minister in one of the cabinets in Kerala. And I don’t think anybody has alleged any bias against him – that he belonged to a particular political philosophy and that was reflected in his judgments. So we are least concerned with the personal inclinations as a lawyer. The question is whether he is a good lawyer, sound lawyer, whether he has inclination to do work of a judge.