We all know that Chief Justice of India K. G. Balakrishnan didn’t want assets of the judges to be made public. His argument was that this would put unnecessary pressure on the judges. But one after the other, high court judges started defying him and went public with their asset details. We also know that the government wanted to keep him in good humour and tried to bring in a bill last year to protect the judges. But the opposition parties made a hue and cry and forced the government to withdraw the bill. Then the inevitable happened and the Delhi high court brought in his office under the ambit of the Right to Information Act. This makes him liable to provide information about appointment of judges, their transfers and other administrative decisions as when someone seeks such information.

Quite apparently, Balakrishnan does not like it. It is also apparent that the supreme court will be challenging the Delhi high court order before itself.  It did once before the high court and the court ratified its earlier decision by a three-member bench.  As the high court gave 60 days’ time for filing an appeal, which can now be done before the apex court only, the apex court is gearing up for the occasion. The deadline is March 12.

None of this really matters. What matters is the way the CJI has gone ahead making his displeasure at the high court order known to all and sundry. He even wrote a letter to the prime minister seeking an amendment in the RTI Act so that his office is kept out of purview.  If that is enough he has been making public statements to the effect. Is it that the CJI is not aware of the fact that this could prejudice the case when it comes up before the apex court in the next few days? Isn’t he guilty of influencing the outcome of the case? What is the point in filing an appeal or hearing the case when the senior most judge of the country has already delivered the judgement? Repeatedly at that.

That is our question for the day.