OPEN LETTER – A Long Overdue Apology Owed by the Institution of Judiciary

By Mathews J. Nedumpara

To
Hon’ble Shri Justice D.Y. Chandrachud,
The Chief Justice of India
Also to
The Judges of the Bombay High Court

Date: 11th March, 2023

Subject: The Institution of Judiciary Owes an Apology to Me, Which I Won’t Insist on or Even Expect, but I Certainly Would Do When It Comes to the Thousands of Slum Dwellers, Mothers with Their Newborn Infants Being Thrown Out of Their Homes onto the Streets, with All Their Belongings Being Confiscated or Bulldozed.

1. Introduction
   What prompts me to address this open letter, in near telegraphic language, is my passion for the institution of the judiciary, of which every lawyer, and indeed, every citizen, is a participant in its truest sense. I do not think there could be two opinions on the fact that our judiciary desperately requires reforms—revolutionary reforms, in many respects.
2. Foundations of Our Judiciary
   The foundations of our institutions are strong. The legal system we inherited from the British, which has roots in classical Roman law, is the foundation of the legal systems of all developed nations. We, the bar and the bench, our elected representatives, and the press, are to be faulted for the current, extremely agonizing state of affairs.
3. Freedom of Criticism and Public Scrutiny
   Any system of governance or power that does not allow itself to be criticized or subject itself to public scrutiny tends to become tyrannical and will ultimately collapse. The Constitution guarantees freedom of thought, speech, and expression. The core of this freedom is the right to criticize the government and other public authorities, including the judiciary—the trustees of the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of the sovereign.
4. Movement Against Corruption
   I started a movement against corruption during my practice in the FERA Tribunal (2000-2006). The Delhi High Court removed the Chairman and members of the FERA Tribunal, not on the grounds of corruption, which could not have been successfully raised, but on our technical plea of a lack of qualification. However, the Supreme Court reversed the order, and they were reinstated. I had to wind up my practice in the FERA Tribunal in Delhi and come to Bombay to appear before the adjudicating authorities, moving from FERA practice to banking.
5. Slum Demolition Case
   Some of my clerks were slum dwellers. I had to move a petition at the residence of the then Chief Justice Mohit Shah when one of my clerk’s shanties was demolished. I led half a dozen women with their newborn infants, some just two and four weeks old, to the residence of the Chief Justice. The Chief Justice referred the matter to your Lordship, marking my first appearance before your Lordship in 2010. Over the years, I have appeared before various judges of the Bombay High Court, even seeking the constitution of a bench on a holiday when authorities, armed with bulldozers and police, came to demolish the shanties of the poor without prior notice. Between 2010 and now, not less than 80,000 shanties have been demolished.
6. Judicial Orders Against the Poor
   These demolitions were not entirely the acts of a heartless state machinery, but the execution of Bombay High Court orders directing high-powered committees—constituted by judicial orders—to demolish illegal structures within a specific timeframe. This was done in response to the so-called PILs of elite organizations like BEAG and serial PIL activist Rayanji Bayanji (Janhit Manch). In W.P. (L) No. 3246 of 2004, a bench led by Justice Bhandari (now a member of the International Court of Justice) and your Lordship passed several directions to secure the demolition of poor slum dwellers’ shanties. Five senior counsels represented various authorities, but not a single slum dweller was made a party to the petition or heard in court.
7. My Resolve to Fight for the Poor
   Though a stranger to Mumbai and aware of my insignificance, I could not remain silent. The still voice from within compelled me to fight for the cause of slum dwellers, regardless of the odds.
8. Confidential Letters and Corruption Allegations
   Witnessing certain questionable practices and being personally convinced of issues of impropriety, I addressed confidential letters to various constitutional authorities, seeking a discreet inquiry. Strangely, some of these letters ended up on the desk of the then Chief Justice himself.
9. Defamation in Open Court
   While representing a client facing dispossession before the bench of CJ Mohit Shah, Dr. Birendra Saraf, now the Advocate General of Maharashtra, accused me in open court of impersonating Justice Vasifdar by calling his client, an AGM of Janakalyan Sahakari Bank. This baseless accusation was an attempt to assassinate my character as an outstation lawyer with no influence in Mumbai. I countered the allegation and demanded action. Dr. Saraf’s client then filed an affidavit falsely claiming I had called him from my mobile. Justice Mohit Shah ordered service providers to produce call records, which proved that I did not call the Bank Manager at all; rather, the Bank Manager called me nine times. Despite this clear evidence, Justice Mohit Shah issued a notice for criminal contempt against me.
10. A Call for Video Recording of Court Proceedings
    Holding the call records in a crowded courtroom, with the press, lawyers, and litigants present, I asserted that I had not called, but the silence was deafening. Justice Mohit Shah continued to dictate an order in hushed tones. This experience made me realize that video recording of court proceedings and public access to these records are the surest safeguards against judicial injustice.
11. Supreme Court Experience
    On the 5th of March, 2019, while representing NLC in a petition challenging the discriminatory designation system, I referred to Fali S. Nariman to illustrate a point about seniority. For merely mentioning his name, I was convicted for contempt without notice, without a hearing, without an opportunity to defend, and in my absence—an action reminiscent of the Dark Ages.
12. An Opportunity for Reform
    Justice R. Nariman’s decision to convict me for contempt, despite my innocent intentions, was a stark reminder of the need for reform. In retrospect, I see my ordeal as a providential opportunity to advocate for democratizing the bar and bench, ending dynasties and judgeocracy, and bringing transparency to the judicial system.
13. A Personal Apology and a Larger Mission
    I could still pursue contempt charges against Dr. Saraf or move to revoke his license to practice, but my focus is broader. My mission is to reform the legal system, to bring about a judiciary that is transparent and accountable.
14. A Plea for Institutional Accountability
    The institution owes me an apology, though I do not expect to receive it. However, an apology is owed to the thousands who were rendered homeless, to the school children whose study materials were destroyed, and to the poor who lost everything. An acknowledgment of these injustices, much like Pope Francis’s apology for the Church’s historical wrongs, would reinforce the judiciary’s sanctity, not undermine it.

With kind regards,
Yours Sincerely,
Mathews J. Nedumpara

P.S. Anyone doubting the accuracy of my account may access the official records. W.P. (Crl) No. 457/2016 filed by Dr. Saraf, seeking to quash the complaint I lodged against him, itself corroborates the facts stated above