Synopsis: A bench, led by Justice Arun Mishra ruled the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as “infructuous” and said that the petitioner hasn’t pushed for a hearing in the past two years and, furthermore, Justice Gogoi has already vacated his office.
On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to entertain a plea requesting the constitution of a panel of three judges to probe the conduct of former Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi as an Apex Court judge.
Although terming the Public Interest Litigation ( PIL) as ineffective, the bench questioned why the petitioner hasn’t pushed for the hearing in the past two years. The court also added that as Justice Gogoi vacated from his office, the petition has become infructuous. The bench, which also included Justices B R Gavai and Krishna Murari, said they could not consider the appeal, which had requested inquiry into the alleged omission and commission of Justice (retd) Gogoi as a judge of the Apex Court.
The petitioner, Arun Ramchandra Hublikar, argued before the bench that he had met with the Apex Court’s Secretary-General for listing his petition but it was not listed.
A Rajya Sabha Member currently, Justice Gogoi served 13 months as the 46th CJI, from October 2018 to November 2019. He was a Supreme Court judge between April, 2012 and November, 2019, for seven years and six months. Justice Gogoi is the first person from the northeast to reach the top of the judiciary and has been credited for bringing down the curtains on the decades-old politically and religiously sensitive Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, heading the five-judge bench and paving the way for the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya.
The Supreme Court bench had unanimously agreed to give the contested Ayodhya plot to a trust that will oversee the construction of a Ram temple there. The bench also ordered that Muslims be allotted a separate five-acre plot in Ayodhya to build a mosque.
Justice Gogoi was elected to Rajya Sabha on March 16. Three days later he rendered oath in Parliament. He was once accused in a sexual harassment case after he was levelled by a women employee’s allegations. The woman, who had previously served as a junior court assistant at the Supreme Court in April of last year, alleged in an affidavit that on October 10 and October 11, 2018, he had made sexual advances on her at his residence office. However, he refuted the charges during the special hearing, in April 20. The chief justice had said that he did not “deem it necessary” to address the charges, but believed that they were part of a “bigger conspiracy” to “deactivate the CJI’s office.”