Blog

>Blog
Blog 2021-06-16T12:46:43+00:00

“No army can stop an idea whose time has come”

Mathews J Nedumpara27.3.2020 The order of Justice Nariman of the Supreme Court banning me from practicing in the Supreme Court which had expired was the banning of an idea whose time has come which no army can stop. I was convicted for contempt in the face of the court for quoting Shri Fali S Nariman, Justice Nariman's father, that in the matter of designation as Senior Advocate, the only thing that matters is the seniority reckoned from the date of enrollment. That was the only thing I have been in agreement with Shri Fali S Nariman. I was convicted for taking the name of Shri Fali Nariman and saying what I quoted above which I wonder how amounts to contempt in the face of the court, in my absence, without even a proceeding, without a charge, not even an oral one, without a lawyer in my defense, without a hearing, whatsoever. I came to know of the contempt proceedings against me which was not even instituted, while far away at Mumbai from the print and electronic media on 12th of March, 2019. My conviction shocked me. It shouldn't have, because I had a few past experiences of shocking abuse of the contempt power. A lawyer, if he dares to expose corruption and nepotism and unethical practice in judiciary should be prepared for an onslaught of the abuse of the contempt power. I wrote on 11.2.2011 against a person claiming to be a conduit of then Chief Justice, Mohit Shah. Dr. [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

Jurisprudence of ‘face value’ – High Court of Kerala is an exception

JURISPRUDENCE OF ‘FACE VALUE’ –HIGH COURT OF KERALA IS AN EXCEPTION – By Mathews J. Nedumpara I enrolled as an Advocate with the Bar Council of Kerala in the year 1984. By sheer providence, I was briefed by a partnership firm engaged in the business of banking, in the year 1986 in the Kerala High Court. That was the time when many individuals, either styled as a Partnership or a Company, used to take huge deposits, particularly from NRIs, offering astronomical rates of interest. They functioned quite similar to regular banking institutions. The only difference is that they received deposits at the rate of 24 % to 36 % and used to lend money at 120%. Apart from so lending the money, they used to divert the funds for their own private business, particularly in real estate. There were hundreds of complaints against my client. In one set of complaints, the allegation was that my client who had accepted deposit failed to repay the same when demanded in terms of the agreement/contract and thereby committed the offence of cheating. The allegation in the other set of complaints was that the depositor had entrusted the money with my client and by failing to repay the same he has committed criminal breach of trust. I filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the complaints. My contention was that no offence of cheating was made out because the sole allegation is that the depositor had made the [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

Has not Article 137 of the constitution providing for review become otiose, so too, the curative jurisprudence created through judicial legislation, unknown to jurisprudence elsewhere in the world

Mathews J NedumparaPresident, NLC98205 3542820.8.2021 Has not Article 137 of the constitution providing for review become otiose, so too, the curative jurisprudence created through judicial legislation, unknown to jurisprudence elsewhere in the world. One of the senior most members of the NLC, out of anguish that SLPs, review petitions and curative petitions are dismissed in one-line/stereotypical orders, preferred an application under the RTI Act seeking the data concerning the total number of petitions filed under each category, the average time taken for hearing and final disposal and the percentage of such petitions being allowed or dismissed. The Registry of the Supreme Court replied to him saying that the Court does not maintain any data concerning the same, even as to the number of matters dismissed or allowed. However, he did not give up. He sought the help of member of Parliament. And the said MP raised a question in the Parliament. The then Hon'ble Minister for Law and Justice answered the said query on the floor of the House on 3.2.2021 thus: In the 10yr period between 2011 to 2020 a)Review petitions (civil) dismissed- 19710Allowed- 92 b) Review Petitions (Crl)Dismissed- 6087Allowed- 48 c) Curative petitions (civil)Dismissed- 2155Allowed- 0 d) Curative petitions (Crl)Dismissed- 620Allowed- 3 So far as curative petitions go, I am not concerned. The curative jurisprudence itself is against the constitution, a judicial legislation, which no court has the power to do. I consider this mechanism to be in ignorance of the elementary jurisprudence. The court failed to comprehend [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

1. Review of the NJAC case 2. Dismantling of the collegium 3. Audience with your kind self

Mathews J NedumparaPresident,National Lawyers' Campaign For Judicial Transparency And Reforms TELEGRAPHIC LETTER_FOR THE ATTENTION OF PM 29 April 2018 To, Hon’ble Sri Narendra Modi,The Prime Minister of IndiaRoom No. 246, South Block,Raisina Hills, New Delhi Hon’ble Sri Modi Ji Subject: 1. Review of the NJAC case 2. Dismantling of the collegium 3. Audience with your kind self. Ref: Umpteen letters addressed to your Hon’ble self, some of which have not even been acknowledged. I address you sir, in a telegraphic language as the President of NLC in the hope that atleast this will receive your personal attention in view of the great national importance of the subject. I was the only person who instituted a Substantive Petition in the light of the challenge of the NJAC by Fali Nariman & Co. that the Act is Constitutional and the Legislation being in the realm of policy is not justiciable. I also sought a declaration that the Judges 2 & 3 cases are null and void; per incuriam as well. I also sought a declaration that if the NJAC is justiciable, then every citizen has a right to be heard and not merely the Nariman & Co. and am afraid to say, the large brigade of sycophants of the Supreme Court Bar who consider it profitable to be seen defending the cause of the Judges, because the greatest law today is the “Face Law”. I asserted that the judges are the real petitioners in the NJAC case and the courts decision striking [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

Supreme Court of India or the Court of Henry ll?

Mathews J Nedumpara98205 3542812.5.2021 Supreme Court of India or the Court of Henry ll? Many of us may not know our connection with the Roman law. Julius Caesar invaded Britain in 55 BC and England was under the Roman rule from AD 43 to AD 410. The Romans made many highways, some of which are in existence even today. I make a mention of highways because it has a connection with our criminal jurisprudence. In the early medieval days, all crimes were not considered as an offence against the king and his peace. Offences like treason, disseisin (seizing of land belonging to another) which affected the King's interest alone were considered as an offence against the state. Other crimes were regarded as mere tort, matters falling in the domain of the Baron's Court, Manorial Court, etc. Kings used to sell jurisdiction, which led to rapine and unjust judgements at the hands of private tribunals dispensing justice. This, among other reasons, led to the Barons revolting against the King and compelling him to issue the Magna Carta, the great charter, where the King undertook "Nulla vendemus, nulla negabimus aut differemus, rectum aut justitiam" - to no man will we sell, or deny, or delay, right or justice. A crime committed on the four highways built by the Romans was considered as a felony, triable by the King's Court, because it affected the King's interest. The Romans were ousted by Saxons (Germans) and they ruled over England till the Norman conquest of [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

Objectives of National Lawyers’ Campaign For Judicial Transparency And Reforms

National Lawyers' Campaign For Judicial Transparency And Reforms Objectives 1) Advertisement of vacancies of Judges of the higher judiciary;2) Creation of a Judicial Ombudsman;3) Audio/video-recording of proceedings of all Courts and Tribunals;4) Reintroduction of the transfer policy;5) Bring an end to the “Uncle Judge Syndrome”;6) Abolition of the practice of designation of Advocates as a Senior Advocates;7) Repeal of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971;8) Introduce a transparent mechanism in the appointment of Standing Counsel/Panel Advocates/Legal Officers for State9) Simplification of procedures;10) To bring an end to the tribunalisation of justice;11) Within the original jurisdiction under Articles 226, 32 and also within Article, 136 to allow the parties to adduce evidence and bring in at least a modicum of fairness in the decision-making process.12) Introduction of moratorium or cooling period for the post retirement appointment of Judges in to any public offices. Mathews J NedumparaPresident

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

Emergent judicial reforms lest supremacy of the Constitution and the Parliament, nay, democracy should be put to great jeopardy, and “judgeocracy” is further perpetuated through PILs

5.9.2020AN OPEN LETTERMATHEWS J. NEDUMPARAPresidentNATIONAL LAWYERS CAMPAIGN FOR JUDICIALTRANSPARENCY AND REFORMS304, Hari Chambers, 3rd Floor, 58-64, S.B.S. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 023No. 11, DD Tudor Villa, Padam Road, Vaduthala- 682 023Mob: +91 9820535428 email: mathewsjnedumpara@gmail.com To, Hon'ble Shri. Narendra Modi,The Prime Minister of India. Hon'ble Smt. Sonia Gandhi,President of INC. Leaders of the various political parties,Members of Parliament, Members of the legal fraternity,press, the public at large. Hon'ble Sirs and Mesdames, Sub: Emergent judicial reforms lest supremacy of the Constitution and the Parliament, nay, democracy should be put to great jeopardy, and “judgeocracy” is further perpetuated through PILs. The conviction of Mr. Prashant Bhushan for contempt of court and his being sentenced for a fine of Re.1 which he readily agreed to pay, is a great victory of the very right to dissent, freedom of speech and expression, the very core of democracy. I was jubilant, but in a fraction of a second the horrifying unseen effect of the victory of Mr. Prashant Bhushan came to my mind. On the face of it, it is the victory of democracy, but, in reality, the said victory will undermine the very foundations of the concept of constitutional democracy. Why I say so, I will deal with briefly as infra. Even before the constitution came, the concept of judicial review was very much in existence. The Government of India Act, 1935 was the Constitutional Act. Any law which is contrary to the same was ultra vires, and the civil courts had the jurisdiction to [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

The Judgement in Sabarimala Case Constitutes to be No Res Judicata and Is Not Executable

The Judgement in Sabarimala Case Constitutes to be No Res Judicata and Is Not Executable. Mathews J. Nedumpara 16th November, 2019 What prompts me to pen these few lines is the news item in today’s (16.11.2019) Times of India, Cochin Edition, under the caption “Government must read dissenting ruling in Sabarimala case: Nariman. Cannot allow violation of extremely important ruling: Judge”. Francis Bacon, Lord Chancellor of England, said de fide et officio judicis non recipitur quaestio; sed de scientia, sive error sit juris sive facti – the honesty and integrity of a Judge cannot be questioned, but his decision may be impugned for error either of law or fact, which is a maxim of great sanctity and a fundamental principle of law. The right to dissent is the very essence of the democracy and the freedom of speech and expression enshrined in Article 14, nay, the very right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, which takes within its ambit the right to criticize and dissent judgments of Courts, including of the Supreme Court. Justice Nariman who wrote the dissenting judgment of 14th November, 2019 for himself and Dr. Justice Chandrachud, in paragraph 63 thereof, has acknowledged this principle even by making a reference to the celebrated judgment of the House of Lords in Ambard v Attorney-General for Trinidad and Tobago [1936] AC 322 at 335). Justice Nariman in his dissenting judgment has in categorical terms made it clear that the majority judgment rendered in October, 2018 has declared [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

The reported decision of the collegium of the Rajasthan High Court recommending 17 names for appointment as judges of the Rajasthan High Court

Mathews J NedumparaPresident , NLCOPEN LETTER04.06.2020 Hon'ble Shri. Narendra ModiPrime Minister of IndiaNew DelhiHon'ble Shri S A Bobde,Chief Justice of India.Hon'ble the Chief Justice of Rajasthan.Hon'ble Shri Ashok Galot,Chief Minister of Rajasthan. Sirs, Sub: The reported decision of the collegium of the Rajasthan High Court recommending 17 names for appointment as judges of the Rajasthan High Court. I address this letter with great amount of pain and agony. I wish i were not to address this letter. But I have no choice. As the President of the National Lawyers Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms, an organization registered under the Maharashtra Public Charitable Trust Act, and as one who is leading a campaign which has thousands of members as participants in different parts of the country, I will be failing in my duty if I hesitate to address this letter. I am in Cochin. I have no connection with Rajasthan except through lawyers and activists. I am sure even my adversaries would not attribute any kind of malice for I do not know any one of the 17 lawyers recommended for elevation, much less even heard of them. What I heard from certain sources, on the face of it, is very disturbing. The allegation is that many of the lawyers recommended are not eligible or deserving, but are recommended only because of their kinship and other connections. For example, one of the candidate, namely, Mrs. Alka Bhatnagar , is the mother-in-law of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naveen Sinha's son. If selection [...]

September 14th, 2021|0 Comments

“Lord, forgive them for they know not what they do”, adieu Justice Nariman”

Mathews J Nedumpara 98205 35428 11.08.2021 The common citizens, particularly, the informed section, are proud that we have one of the best and most comprehensive constitutions in the world. Our constitution has a specific chapter stating in great elaboration, the sacrosanct rights such as equality, freedom of speech and expression, life and personal liberty, faith and conscience, etc. By virtue of Article 32 when these fundamental rights are infringed, a citizen as a matter of right, is entitled to approach the Supreme Court directly without recourse to any other Court, though otherwise the law is that one shall invoke the jurisdiction of the lowest court of competent jurisdiction. The common people, even law students, budding lawyers, law professors and academicians believe firmly that the real courts function according to the set of constitutional and other legal principles. They believe that, that is the law. But seasoned lawyers and seasoned litigants know from experience that the constitution, the enacted laws and the settled legal principles are mere myth. The real law is what lawyers and judges do and practice in the name of law. The writ jurisdiction is asserted to be an entirely discretionary one. Article 136 of the constitution expressly states that "the Supreme Court may in its discretion grant special leave to appeal..". The equitable remedies like injunction commonly known as 'stay' are all discretionary. We follow the common law. Article 372 of the constitution says so. The common law has its foundations in classical Roman law. But the classical Roman [...]

August 10th, 2021|5 Comments