New Delhi: The Supreme Court collegium, while recommending the elevation of an advocate to the Bombay High Court, has observed that views expressed by a senior advocate have no bearing on the capacity, capability or credibility of his junior, who is eligible to become a High Court judge. is a possible candidate. ,
In a meeting held on Tuesday, the three-member collegium approved three names for the Bombay High Court — Shailesh Pramod Brahme, Firdosh Firoz Pooniwala and Jitendra Shantilal Jain. It also approved the appointment of an additional judge of the Gauhati High Court – Justice Robin Phukan – as a permanent judge of the same court.
The collegium is headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and also includes Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph.
As per the resolution uploaded in respect of the three names accepted for the Bombay High Court, the Collegium notes that in Pooniwala’s case, the Intelligence Bureau (IB) had flagged an article written by a former senior in 2020, where The latter had expressed concern over the perceived lack of freedom of speech or expression in the country over the past 5 to 6 years.
However, there was nothing prejudicial to the integrity or suitability of Puniwala in the IB’s inputs, records the resolution.
With regard to his senior’s article, the Collegium observed that a junior counsel attached to the chamber of a senior in the original side (civil side) is not engaged in an employer-employee relationship with him.
While attached to the junior chamber, they are free to do their own work, and, for all intents and purposes, are entitled to independent legal practice.
Noting that the advisor-judges have favored Puniwala’s name for elevation, the collegium’s resolution recorded: “The candidate has wide practice at the Bar and is specialized in commercial law. The candidate professes Parsi Zoroastrianism and belongs to minority community. Taking into account the above aspects and on an overall consideration of the proposal for his elevation, the Collegium is of the considered opinion that Firdosh Firoz Pooniwala is suitable for appointment as a Judge of the High Court of Bombay.
factors that make a good decision
In a separate resolution, while proposing the appointment of Justice Phukan as a permanent judge, the collegium has for the first time listed the factors that are taken into account while evaluating the judgments of judges who were earlier designated as additional judges. are appointed as Judges for their confirmation as permanent.
According to Sankalpa, there are 11 factors for good decision making. These are expressions, structures of judgments with proper recording of facts. Clear identification of issues and their reasoned answers, proper consideration of settled legal propositions, consideration of submissions made by counsel in a case, adequate reference to material and relevant arguments, appreciation of circumstantial evidence and proper imposition of “sentence”.
The collegium took note of a report submitted by a committee of the Supreme Court, which assessed Justice Phukan’s decisions on the above-mentioned factors while confirming him as a permanent judge of the Gauhati HC.
(Editing by Sunanda Ranjan)