By IANS,
Kochi : The Kerala High Court Friday took strong exception to the various statements made by leaders of the state’s ruling Communist Party of India-Marxist against judges in the past few days.
A division bench headed by Chief Justice J. Chelameswar, while disposing a petition Friday morning, asked the state’s advocate general to appear before it in the afternoon and told him that “criticising judgments is understandable but attacking the judges personally does not augur well for democracy”.
“We are bringing this before the advocate general because this is a serious issue and such sort of personal attacks will hinder the smooth functioning of the legal system and this should be avoided,” the bench said.
CPI-M leaders have been making statements again the judges since last week when the court ruled that henceforth there should be no wayside meetings held on the roads in the state.
Former CPI-M legislator and senior party leader M.V. Jayarajan was the first to attack the judges who gave this verdict, and then another senior party leader E.P. Jayarajan also criticised the judgment.
The Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI), the youth wing of the CPI-M, organised marches to various courts in the state. Its leaders publicly admonished judges for the ruling and said that they have no fear of being sent to jail for making such remarks.
The issue surfaced in the assembly also Friday. Leader of Opposition Oommen Chandy said the advocate general was silent when the high court said that no more public meetings should be held on the roads in the state, but in the past few days, party cadres and leaders had unleashed a verbal attack against the judiciary.
“They marched towards the courts in the state and police remained a mute spectator. This means the government is also party to these verbal attacks unleashed by your leaders,” he said.
Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan later told reporters that his government had the highest regard for the judiciary but the recent verdict of the high court banning public assembly of people on roads would have far-reaching implications.
“We request the opposition to join us when we give an appeal against the high court verdict. The court had a responsibility to ask the government its views before going ahead with a ban on public assembly of people on the roads. The statements by political leaders against this verdict should be seen as an instant reaction and nothing more than that,” he said.