Justice K.T. Sankaran’s revelation that he was offered a bribe to favor the accused in a gold smuggling case in the Kerala High Court came as a shocker. However, this was not the first time that attempts were made to scupper judicial process by tempting and influencing judges.
A judge's satirical observation that both parties in an election case had tried to influence his judgment and former minister Paloli Muhammed Kutty's later-retracted statement that judgments were delivered as per the thickness of currency notes brought the issue to focus.
Justice N.D.P. Namboodiripad nailed the menace when he passed a judgment nixing C.H. Muhammed Koya's election from the Malappuram constituency. The judge said the judgment was worth Rs 7 lakh! He explained that he had received a letter offering Rs 2 lakh if he dismissed the complaint against Koya. He said he was also offered Rs 5 lakh if he ruled in favor of the complainant.
More recently, Justice C.T. Ravikumar recused himself from the cases related to bar licences alleging that attempts were made to influence him. The judge was to decide on 54 petitions related to the granting of bar licences when he recused in April 2014, saying an advocate had visited him in his house to talk about it.
This was perhaps the first time a judge had recused himself from a case after citing such a reason. The advocate later claimed that his was just a personal visit.
Even Supreme Court judges have talked about the pressure they had to endure in their line of work. Justice J.S. Kehar recused from the Sahara Group case after informing the Chief Justice of India. It was later revealed that he had come under pressure in the case.
A bench, including Justice Kehar and Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan, had dismissed a plea to reconsider an earlier order in a case related to Sahara boss Subrato Roy.
Justice Radhakrishnan revealed the pressure piled on him and his colleague, at the time of his retirement.
The Paloli Muhammed Kutty episode presented a different side of the issue. The CPM leader landed in soup when he said the courts were delivering judgments in accordance with the thickness of currency notes.
The Kerala High Court took offence of the statement and initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against the minister. The case went up to the Supreme Court. Paloli chose to diffuse the situation by apologizing to the court. He explained that he had the rising legal expenses in mind when he said that.
