Former Supreme Court judge Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul said that then Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud asked him to take a "middle path" in the petitions seeking reconsideration of the Supreme Court's judgment upholding key provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

In another revelation, Justice Kaul said that the case concerning delays in judicial appointments was withdrawn from his bench when he was attempting to push the Union Government to act on pending collegium recommendations. He said that the then CJI appeared to have been under some pressure to remove the matter from his bench, though he could not say whether the government had exerted that pressure.

Speaking to journalist Karan Thapar of The Wire about his forthcoming memoir, Without Fear or Favour, Justice Kaul recounted his interactions with CJI Chandrachud concerning both matters.

'Never taken middle path'

Recounting the episode concerning the PMLA case, Justice Kaul said that CJI Chandrachud had called him to his chambers while a three-judge bench headed by him was scheduled to hear the petitions seeking reconsideration of the judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India.

Justice Kaul said that Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who was part of the bench, was also present during the discussion.

According to Justice Kaul, CJI attempted to persuade him to not proceed with the matter and suggested that, if he decided to go ahead, he should exercise caution and take a "middle path".

Justice Kaul said he decided to proceed with the hearing because backing out would have cast a shadow on his integrity.

"What would people talk about me, that I am taking money for this? If after 22 years of my judgeship, I am cowing down on this kind of issue, then I have not done my job. My integrity is something which I value very much, not at the cost of somebody trying to push me," he said.

Justice Kaul said he told the CJI that he had never taken a middle path in his judicial career and had proceeded with matters whenever he believed that doing so was right.

"In my judicial career, I have never taken the middle path ever in any way. If I feel right about a matter, I have gone ahead with it," he recalled telling the CJI.

Justice Kaul added that, following the discussion, he and Justice Khanna walked to the courtroom to proceed with the hearing.

Justice Kaul said that the Union wanted to drag the matter till his retirement, and kept on seeking adjournments; eventually, the bench was dissolved shortly ahead of his retirement.

The petitions before the bench sought reconsideration of the Supreme Court's 2022 judgment in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, which upheld several provisions of the PMLA, including the Enforcement Directorate's powers of arrest, search and seizure, as well as the stringent twin conditions for bail.

PMLA matter was sought to be removed from J Kaul's bench

Justice Kaul further said that before the hearing, there was an attempt to shift the case from his bench.

During the interview, Thapar asked whether it is true that an "attempt" was made to take the case away from him.

Thapar asked whether it's true that the judicial appointment matter was taken away from him by former CJI Chandrachud on the anticipation that some adverse orders could be passed against the government.

Responding to this, Justice Kaul termed the incident "very peculiar" and stated that what the bench was really trying to do in that matter was to give a "little push" to the government to not delay judicial appointments.

Justice Kaul, along with Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, was part of the bench that was hearing contempt petitions filed against the central government over delay in appointment of judges. Over the hearings, the bench had criticised the government for sitting on the collegium resolution and its "pick and choose" approach. However, suddenly, the matter was deleted from the causelist of the bench.

"We were slowly pushing things in the handling of that matter. I don't know why that matter, at that stage, was taken away. Naturally, the petitioners were very aggrieved, so they mentioned it, and I called the concerned Registrar of the Supreme Court to the court. He came and said he would meet me at lunch and tell me. I didn't want to embarrass him. So, at lunch, he told me there was a noting on the file that maybe when it was assigned to me 2 years ago, some formal permission from the Chief Justice was not taken. So, it was thought fit to withdraw the matter," he said.

Justice Kaul stated that he had conveyed his grievance to the CJI that the manner in which the matter was taken away from him shouldn't have happened.

When Thapar pointed out the observation in the memoir that the "Chief Justice was under some pressure", Justice Kaul replied, "He must have believed that I should not handle the matter."

On being asked whether the CJI was nudged by the Government to remove the case from Justice Kaul's bench, he said, "difficult for me to say."

Also from the interview - CJI Chandrachud Used To Seek Government's Pre-Approval Before Collegium Discussed Names For Judicial Appointments : Justice Kaul