CJAR's Request To Treat Rs 25 Lakh Costs Deposited By It As Donation Referred To SC 3-Judge Bench

The NGO Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) has made a request for treating the 25 lakhs cost imposed on it for filing a PIL seeking SIT probe into the medical college bribery scam as a donation.A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday said that the said request can only be considered by a three-judge bench as the original order was passed by a 3-judge bench. Accordingly, the 2-judge bench directed the posting of the matter before a 3-judge bench.The bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and CT Ravikumar also rejected CJAR's prayer in the application for transferring the cost to the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and instead directed the Registry to transfer the amount to SCBA Advocate Welfare Fund.The bench in its order said,"Prayer clause A of the application is already granted. Prayer clause B cannot be taken forward as the original order dated Dec 1, 217 directs transfer to SCBA Advocate Welfare Fund and not to the Supreme Court Bar Association. Registry may transfer the amount to the SCBA Advocate Welfare Fund. This disposes of prayer Clause B. For prayer clause C, since order was passed by 3 judges combination post this application for consideration of prayer before 3 judge bench. Attornet General had been issued notice and he has graciously assisted us."When the matter was called for hearing, Attorney General for India KK Venugopal submitted that he personally had no objection in treating the cost which was imposed in the nature of penalty as donation."The Cost is in the nature of the penalty and there is a prayer for the amount to be treated as donation. I personally have no objection today to the amount be treated as donation," AG submitted.Making the request for treating the penalty as a donation, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan submitted that CJAR was a platform having retired Judges and imposition of penalty would impose some kind of stigma on several persons who campaign for judicial accountability."There would be a stigma on the people who are a part of judicial accountability....reputation of a lot of people is on the line. We ask for this simple favour", Dhavan submitted."Problem is that the same can only be done by 3 judge bench. We'll post it before a 3 judge bench. Order has been passed and it'll be appropriate to post it before a 3 judge bench", Justice Khanwilkar said. BackgroundIt was in December 2017 that a three-judge bench imposed the cost on CJAR while dismissing its PIL seeking SIT probe into the medical college bribery case allegedly involving few judges. Directions were issued to the petitioner to deposit the cost before the Registry within six weeks."The petition is not only wholly frivolous, but contemptuous, unwarranted, aimed at scandalizing the highest judicial system of the country, without any reasonable basis and filed in an irresponsible manner, that too by a body of persons professing to espouse the cause of accountability. What an irony of fate, the petitioner has itself forgotten its accountability and filing of such petition may entail in ultimate debarment of such petitioners from filing so-called public interest litigation which in fact has caused more injury to the cause of the public than subserving it," the Court had observed.In January 2021, the Court had condoned the delay in CJAR paying the cost.Case Title: Campaign For Judicial Accountability And Reforms Secretary Versus Union Of India Secretary And Ors.| MA 2109/2020 In W.P.(Crl.) No. 169/2017 PIL- WClick Here To Read/Download Order

CJAR's Request To Treat Rs 25 Lakh Costs Deposited By It As Donation Referred To SC 3-Judge Bench

Shruti Kakkar

Tags