New Delhi, India: September 6, 2009 - Dr. Raj Baldev, Cosmo Theorist, Lead Man of God Believers.

God Believers is a Social & Peace mission which speaks against injustice of all kinds whether from the Govt. department, Judiciary, or anywhere else, but these allegations leveled on Judges of Delhi High Court by the Bar Association in the Mail Today under the article “Uncle Judges run the show in courts” amount to personal attacks rather than the issue concerning the larger interest of justice.

Delhi High Court Bar Council is preparing a document enlisting the detailed particulars of such persons close to the Judges and how they are appointed on govt. panels or selected local commissioners or made associate advocates to the top senior advocates to expect some relief in certain cases which otherwise may or may not come to the litigants. In other words those who can afford such advocates stand better chance for the desired relief than others; this term is commonly known as Uncle Judges, who prefer to be more sympathetic in granting relief to the close ones. The question arises whether other citizens through other advocates are denied justice?

According to Mail Today of the issue of September 6th, 2009, the caption goes as “Uncle Judges run the show in courts” is not a balanced article; it has damaging allegations against the Judges rather than taking the real factors on which the litigants are denied justice or on subjects of “How Law in India is slow or not granting justice, most laws need repealing and many new laws need induction”.

Here the main demand is that the judges should not be allowed to hold courts where their close relative practice or their relatives should not be allowed to appear before them, I don’t think there is any violation about it.
 
The article in Mail Today has proceeded with the allegations as under:

The “Uncle Judges’ syndrome – that is, when advocate children of two or a group of judges practice in each other’s courts – is rampant in many high courts despite the Bar Council of India’s guideline barring lawyers from appearing before close relatives sitting on the bench.

It further says: “However, it is not difficult, to circumvent the Bar Council rule.  This is how it is done. A son or a daughter of Judge A will not appear before their father, but attend “Uncle Judge” B’s court. Then the son or daughter of Judge B will appear before Judge A and not before their father.

DK Sharma, Secretary, Delhi High Court Bar Association, said there are many judges in Delhi High Court whose children or immediate family members practice in the same court. Some of these Judges include Justice A.K.Sikri, Justice Veena Birbal, Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, Justice Anil Kumar, Justice Reva Khetrapal, Justice Mool Chand Garg, and Justice Aruna Suresh, he said.

For instance, Justice Sikri’s son, wife, brother, daughter-in-law and brother-in-law all practice in Delhi High Court.  Justice Veena Birbal’s daughter, husband and brother-in-law do the same, while Justice Vikramajit Sen’s wife runs a law firm in Delhi.

My submission is that if incidentally some advocates are the relatives of Judges, should they be denied their livelihood? Don’t’ they have their fundamental rights to survive? If there is a couple, both advocates, and if one becomes Judge, should the other spouse leave the profession and settle in some other city simply because one of the two has become a Judge? It is all unfair to think like this?

Not everyone takes benefit of “Uncle Judges”, but some do, as the Law Commission report states. “We often hear of complaints about Uncle Judges”.

M.N.Krishnamani, president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, said the Uncle Judge Phenomenon is “the biggest scandal of the country’s judiciary” and is “done on reciprocal basis. Intriguingly, judges’ children with just one or two years of practice have around 200-300 court cases, and their annual earning often ranges between Rs. 1 to 4 Crore, he said,” They are hired to get favorable orders from their fathers and uncles,” he charged.

But I feel that the leveled charges do not seem to be close to reality. I don’t think that the children of judges have 200 to 300 cases or they are charging so exorbitantly or they have income from 1 to 4 crore, it is wrong to charge without a solid proof and a case in point.

Even if close relatives of some judges run law firms once headed by these advocate-turned-judges, as alleged, where is the wrong? And even if some of them are appointed as standing counsels for government bodies and PSUs, or appointed as local commissioners or receivers, still there is nothing wrong; there is a  tough competition, its’ not an easy affair as alleged. Other lawyers are also appointed as Local Commissioners, govt. bodies, PSUs and Standing Counsels, why there should be restrictions on the relatives of the Judges?

There is no doubt that some children of the Judges are practicing in the same court and some people might prefer to route their cases through them with an expectation of getting favors but in my opinion, as I know some of them, get no relief, since the Judges normally can't go beyond law; they may favor where they hold their discretionary powers; if law permits them to give some relief in certain cases, where is the fault on eithr side?

Such relief also goes to other advocates who plead the case or represent the case properly with good home work, judges cant’ refute the law and where at time they try to violate, they should be ready to lose some credit for future promotion, if the favor  granted is challenged. Promotion is dear to every Judge; hence they normally don’t dare go beyond law or misuse their discretionary powers, they are in fact more cautious if anyone known is present before them.  So far I have learnt from other practicing lawyers whom I know closely, and I myself have been a member of Press Council of India, if the decision comes in favor from a Judge in a particular type of case, it can’t go against the other advocate in a similar type of case in the same court?

Each and every citizen in India is privileged with a right to livelihood; to accuse the judges like this is unfair. So far general law in the country  is concerned, God Believers are not satisfied, and may  aoon lodge a suggestive book to improve the entire phenomenon. But so far this article leveling individual allegations against the Judges for accommodating their relatives is concerned, God Believers stand by the Judges and appreciate their Judgements and orders they pronounce, the majority of them are found satisfactory..