Former chief justice of India K G Balakrishnan’s son-in-law P V Srinijan is now in the dock for amassing wealth beyond his legitimate means.
Home department officials visited Srinijan’s house in Thiruvananthapuram on Tuesday to begin investigations. Balakrishnan now serves as chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, while Srinijan is a Congress leader.
Srinijan had declared assets of just Rs 25,000 in 2006. Four years on, he allegedly owns several prime properties, including a riverside plot of 2.5 acres in Thrissur.
More embarrassment was in store for Balakrishnan when former Supreme Court judge V S Krishna Iyer told a TV channel that a former judge had approached him to urge him not to write to the prime minister against Balakrishnan. Well-known jurist Fali Nariman has supported Iyer’s demand for a probe into Srinijan’s wealth. A former member of the National Human Rights Commission is urging Balakrishnan to resign in the wake of the allegations against Srinijan.
Balakrishnan’s tenure as India’s top judge was not without its controversies. He opposed the proposal that judges declare their assets, recommended censorship of the Internet, and tried to exempt the office of the Chief Justice of India from the Right to Information Act.
More recently, in December 2010, reports suggested Balakrishnan could have shielded tainted minister A Raja when a Madras high court judge complained that the politician had threatened him. Balakrishnan had denied receiving any specific complaint, but another judge confirmed that the minister’s wrongdoing had been brought to the notice of the then chief justice.
Bangalore case: Relatives have embarrassed the higher echelons of the judiciary lately. In another case that made it to the headlines recently, Phaniraj Kashyap, son of a Karnataka High Court judge, lost a case in the high court after it came to light that he had been favoured by Bangalore University.
Kashyap had filed contempt cases against two Bangalore newspapers, Deccan Herald and Mid Day, when they reported the university’s lapse. His contention was that the university had used discretionary powers to reevaluate his answer script, but the university revealed it had invoked no such powers.
The Karnataka High Court ruled in favour of the newspapers, and said the judiciary must look inwards, and allow the press to do its duty. The university had picked up Kashyap’s law answer script, keeping thousands of other students waiting. During the trial, it also came to light that the Bangalore University had violated reevaluation procedures to favour him.
Calcutta impeachment: In November 2010, a parliamentary committee cleared the decks for the impeachment of a Calcutta High Court judge. Justice Soumitra Sen was found guilty of pocketing funds and making a false statement. In Kerala, the Kozhikode Bar Association demanded that Supreme Court judge Cyriac Joseph be kept away from handling cases, after an investigator revealed that he had taken personal, and in the view of the advocates, undue interest in the Sister Abhaya murder case. The murdered nun’s father had appealed to president Pratibha Patil for a probe into Justice Cyriac Joseph’s role in the case.
Allahabad case: Late last year, Supreme Court spoke cuttingly about corruption in the Allahabad high court, prompting an activist to file a petition seeking impeachment of guilty judges.