📢 Too many exams? Don’t know which one suits you best? Book Your Free Expert 👉 call Now!

    Question

    Why were all the judges who revolted, were upset with

    the CJI? Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below them. Certain words/phrases have been printed in bold to help you locate them while answering some of the questions. The Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the chief justices of high courts enjoy absolute power in the matter of assigning cases to colleague judges. The nature of the power vested in them is susceptible to misuse and this precisely is what the four judges are insinuating against the CJI. They have alleged that cases of national importance are marked to preferred judges to secure the desired results. It appears that the judges who have revolted against the CJI were upset by the assignment of Judge B M Loya’s matter to Justice Arun Mishra, a junior judge. The mere fact that Justice Mishra is a junior judge in the hierarchy of judges by itself is not a good enough ground to accuse the CJI of wrongdoing, unless there is something more to this than meets the eye. A junior judge is as much a constitutional functionary as his senior colleague. Both discharge the same judicial functions. Hence, by reason of seniority alone, one cannot claim the prerogative to deal with a particular case more so because it is perceived to be of public importance. Having said this, it appears that as a matter of practice and convention, the cases of so-called public importance are generally referred to senior judges. Since the CJI has seemingly deviated from this practice and as it has raised dust and storm , it falls upon the CJI to clear the air as to why Justice Mishra was preferred over his seniors. Earlier also, as reported, in an equally sensational matter, this very judge was preferred over his senior colleagues. Therefore, not only the CJI, all those who would like to see an independent and fearless judiciary need to look into the matter. The CJI has preferred to maintain absolute silence. There is no word from him. A former CJI had once said that in certain matters silence is not an option. I believe this is one such case. The CJI cannot afford to remain quiet. The matter is too serious to be brushed under the carpet . It is a perennial issue and will surface again and again. Therefore, the CJI must speak out and do so loudly and clearly.
    A The CJI has preferred to maintain absolute silence. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    B They were upset by the assignment of Judge B M Loya’s matter to Justice Arun Mishra, a junior judge. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    C The mere fact that Justice Mishra is a junior judge in the hierarchy of judges by itself is not a good enough ground to accuse the CJI of wrongdoing. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    D The matter is too serious to be brushed under the carpet. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    E None of the above. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

    Solution

    It is very much clear from the start of the passage that an issue cropped up due to the powers assigned to the CJI and other judges and they felt that those powers are being misused.

    Practice Next
    More Reading Comprehension Questions

    Relevant for Exams:

    ask-question