The Supreme Court (SC) has intensified its inquiry into the controversial remarks made by Allahabad High Court Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav at an event organized by the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP). Weeks after the SC initially took note of the issue, the collegium, led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, has now requested a fresh report from Allahabad High Court Chief Justice Arun Bhansali.
The controversy began after Justice Yadav’s speech on December 8, in which he used the term “kathmulla” and claimed that Muslim children lacked qualities like tolerance and generosity due to exposure to violence, specifically referencing animal slaughter. He compared this to Hindu children, who he claimed were raised with teachings of kindness and non-violence. Justice Yadav further remarked that India would operate in accordance with the majority’s wishes, implying a Hindu-centric ideology.
The comments sparked widespread criticism, including condemnation from the Bar Association of India and other legal and civil rights organizations. The remarks were viewed as a breach of judicial impartiality, raising questions about the judge’s conduct and his ability to uphold constitutional values.
Three weeks ago, the SC collegium summoned Justice Yadav to explain his statements, with a meeting held on December 17. Despite this, no apology or formal explanation has been forthcoming from Justice Yadav, who has reportedly remained steadfast in defending his remarks. The latest step by the SC, seeking a fresh report, indicates the continuation of its inquiry into the matter.
The SC’s actions align with a precedent set in a 1995 judgment in C. Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice A. M. Bhattacharjee and Others, which dealt with allegations of financial impropriety against the then Chief Justice of Bombay High Court, A. M. Bhattacharjee. The judgment established that when a complaint is lodged against a High Court judge, the Chief Justice of that High Court must conduct an inquiry in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. Justice Bhattacharjee resigned after the allegations, and the judgment set a procedural precedent for future cases involving judicial misconduct.
As the SC moves forward with its investigation, the case highlights the importance of judicial accountability and the need for judges to uphold impartiality in both their rulings and public statements. The outcome of this inquiry is awaited, as it could have significant implications for Justice Yadav’s position and broader discussions on judicial ethics in India.