C. RAVICHANDRAN IYER versus JUSTICE A.M. BHATTACHARJEE

C. RAVICHANDRAN IYER versus JUSTICE A.M. BHATTACHARJEE

Bar Associations or Bar Councils have no constitutional authority to investigate, discuss, or pass resolutions demanding resignation of a Judge for alleged misbehaviour, except as per procedure prescribed under Articles 124(4), 124(5) and the Judges (Inquiry) Act. The correct course is to convey verified complaints through the Chief Justice of the High Court (or directly to Chief Justice of India if allegations are against the Chief Justice) who may consult the Chief Justice of India. Self-regulation by the judiciary, through inhouse mechanisms, is the only constitutionally acceptable remedy for alleged judicial misconduct short of impeachable offences. This preserves the independence and...

Parties
Petitioner: C. RA Vichandran Iyer; Respondent No. 1: Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee; Respondent No. 2: Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa; Respondent No. 3: Bombay Bar Association; Respondent No. 4: Advocates' Association of Western India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 September 1995
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution / Final Disposition by Supreme Court
Outcome
Writ petition disposed of
Legal Topics
Impeachment of Judges, Judicial Misconduct, Independence of Judiciary, Role of Bar Associations, Self Regulation by Judiciary, Contempt of Court
Constitutional Law Judiciary Impeachment of Judges Judicial Misconduct Independence of Judiciary Role of Bar Associations Self Regulation by Judiciary Contempt of Court

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C. RA Vichandran Iyer

Petitioner

Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee

Respondent No. 1

Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa

Respondent No. 2

Bombay Bar Association

Respondent No. 3

Advocates' Association of Western India

Respondent No. 4

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution / Final Disposition by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Bar Councils or Bar Associations have the right to pass resolutions against the conduct of a Judge perceived to have committed misbehaviour and its effect on judicial independence

Ratio Decidendi

Bar Associations or Bar Councils have no constitutional authority to investigate, discuss, or pass resolutions demanding resignation of a Judge for alleged misbehaviour, except as per procedure prescribed under Articles 124(4), 124(5) and the Judges (Inquiry) Act. The correct course is to convey verified complaints through the Chief Justice of the High Court (or directly to Chief Justice of India if allegations are against the Chief Justice) who may consult the Chief Justice of India. Self-regulation by the judiciary, through inhouse mechanisms, is the only constitutionally acceptable remedy for alleged judicial misconduct short of impeachable offences. This preserves the independence and...

Court Disposition

Writ petition disposed of

Orders

  • No relief as the first respondent had already demitted office
  • Guidelines for future complaints against Judges: route verified complaints through Chief Justice of the High Court or directly to Chief Justice of India, who may initiate appropriate action