Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal retired as a judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court this month after over 11 years and 5 months on the Bench.

He also served as a judge of the Rajasthan High Court for less than 2 years before being transferred back to his parent High Court.

Prior to his elevation to the Bench, Justice Grewal had served as State counsel for about 19 years.

Beyond the courtroom, he had made a name for himself as an avid golfer and had also represented Punjab in cricket at the national level.

In this interview, Justice Grewal spoke to Bar & Bench's Sofi Ahsan about his career, his judicial interventions, his views on the Collegium and transfers of High Court judges and more.

Edited excerpts follow.

Sofi Ahsan (SA): How was the experience on the Bench?

Justice Grewal: It has been pretty good. When I was elevated, 12 of us were elevated from Punjab and Haryana High Court and at the same time, a list of about 10 names had come from Rajasthan, and only 1 was cleared...So there was a shortage of judges in the Rajasthan High Court...In Rajasthan, I was initially posted in Jodhpur. I then sought transfer to Jaipur and it was accepted after about 4 to 5 months. In fact, there's a lot of difference between Jodhpur and Jaipur.

One of the challenges which I faced was that Hindi language is permitted for the High Court proceedings there. Petitions can be filed in Hindi.

I had no difficulty when the lawyers were arguing in Hindi, but reading Hindi was a little bit of a problem initially, as I had studied Hindi only till Class 8. So I subscribed to two newspapers - Rajasthan Patrika and Dainik Bhaskar. I started reading them and then when I came back from Rajasthan, my Hindi was better than my Punjabi. 

In Chandigarh, it was a great feeling to be back home because here you are more comfortable with the kind of laws and with the Bar also. I think I would have been more efficient had I remained here only.

SA: You were a first generation lawyer - you studied history but later shifted to law. How did the transition come about and what struggles, if any, did you face as a lawyer?

Justice Grewal: Practice was very difficult initially. When I studied law and came here, everybody started saying very discouraging things. They would say - how will you manage, you are a first-generation lawyer. Anybody in your family is into law? They used to say every second, third house is an advocate's house in Chandigarh.

Initially, I joined Rajiv Atma Ram, who was like a mentor. In fact, I used to play cricket for Punjab and later started playing golf. Mr Atma Ram was also a golfer. After lunch, a lot of times, we would be at the golf course. While practising law that time, I played golf at the national level and came second in the Northern India Amateur Golf Championship.

Later, I joined Hira Lal Sibal. He gave me the opportunity to argue land acquisition matters on behalf of the State of Haryana when he was the Advocate General. Then I joined the Punjab Advocate General office in 1995 and started  doing all kinds of cases. I continued for about 19 years and I was promoted from time to time, the last 9 years as Additional Advocate General.

I was asked to argue an interesting case before an additional sessions judge. It was Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal, who is now a judge of the High Court. In fact, when she was elevated, she sat with me on the first day in my Division Bench.

This matter was pertaining to an assassin of the late Chief Minister Beant Singh. She had passed orders, given a warrant to execute a convict, but the State government did not want to execute him because the appeals of the co-convicts were pending before the Supreme Court. So I was asked to argue the case.

It was a very volatile situation. There was curfew in many parts of Punjab and even Europe was on red alert. I was given clear instructions that we are not going to hang...There was a judgment of the Supreme Court that it is the duty of the jail superintendent that before he executes, he has to clarify and to ensure that the appeal of any co-convict is not pending. Eventually, a mercy petition was filed and the execution was stayed.

SA: How did your elevation come about?

Justice Grewal: It took me quite a while to make it. The recommendations went in November 2010 and 6 lawyers, including me, were considered. I was considered and it is recorded in the minutes that their cases are deferred for consideration in the future. While I was being considered, 4 other recommendations were there but my name was not there. It was the sixth time that I made it. I think Justice [Sanjay Kishan] Kaul had come [as Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice] at that time, he had a wider consultation.

SA: How much does this delay affect a candidate?

Justice Grewal: There is obviously a little bit of uncertainty but there is a strong mechanism - the Collegium system. But, of course, there could be some improvements in that. 

SA: There was a lot of opposition in 2014 when you and other judges were transferred to Rajasthan. What is your view on transfer of High Court judges?

Justice Grewal: We were surprised to see the [opposition] from the former judges of the Supreme Court and High Court. They were a little perturbed about the transfer because 3 of us were transferred.

In fact, the column about the practice of judge’s relatives says ‘ if any spouse or blood relation’ is practicing. You have to disclose that, then there's probably a cooling off period, but none of us had any spouse or blood relation practicing.

When you are transferred and you are sent to another place, sometimes people think there would be some issues. The moment you say ‘transfer’, you kind of become a suspect. I had to explain that there was a shortage of judges.

I think transfers need to be a little more transparent. Either it would be a good idea if you could transfer everyone for some tenure, or maybe if you were to go for 2 or 3 years and see another High Court, then the judge knows that they are going to come back. I think a lot of judges would not mind it then. But like this, suddenly you're transferred and there is no certainty about coming back...

...The issue was there were 5 judges from Punjab and Haryana High Court in the Rajasthan High Court. So there was some opposition. The list of Rajasthan lawyers was not being cleared. And in fact, the Chairman of the Bar Council in Rajasthan once said that lawyers from Punjab and High Court are benefitting at the expense of lawyers from Rajasthan. So the government then wrote that it was not a good policy to have five judges from one court in another. After that, the Collegium transferred us back. 

SA: What do you think about the process of appointing High Court judges? Your views on the Collegium system. 

Justice Grewal: The Collegium system is working well. I think the Collegium needs to have a little wider consultation, because the Chief Justice is from another High Court. Rather than just relying on 3 [senior-most judges], they should have informal consultation with the rest of the judges in the High Court.

Sometimes, a candidate is good but has not been able to appear before the Collegium judges. A wider consultation is required there.

SA: As a judge in Chandigarh, you extensively looked into police misconduct, especially in jails in Punjab. Did the State take your concerns seriously and remedy them?

Justice Grewal: I was aware of the situation because as a counsel for the State of Punjab for 19 years, I had handled a lot of very important matters pertaining to the police.

I had taken up that one matter. There was a police constable who was being let off, but later on was dismissed. He filed a petition stating that several other persons involved in criminal cases were continuing in service. So I asked for the list of the cases.

The State was very reluctant. This was probably in 2019-2020. With great difficulty, we got the list. The DGP asked the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to send the list, but some names were missing. And then I think one of the other benches took a serious view and had to issue a notice for perjury against the Additional Chief Secretary. Then the list came and it was quite startling.

One of the persons we were in fact trying to concentrate on...as I always do, the higher rank officers. Otherwise, it's a very common tendency to make the lower rung officers scapegoats and they are working under tremendous stress. Their job is very difficult. One of the names which came up was basically a PPS officer and had been posted as SSP Gurdaspur, which is an IPS-cadre post. He had been convicted and sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment for abduction. His appeal was pending in the High Court, only his sentence had been suspended. There was no stay on the conviction. Despite that - and he was very junior, there would be hundreds of other officers senior to him - he was posted as SSP Gurdaspur. So I directed the competent authority to immediately consider transferring him from there. I think they did it.

SA: What steps are required to ensure police reforms?

Justice Grewal: There's a Supreme Court judgment on police reforms in the Prakash Singh case. It has really not been implemented. Police reforms are very important because the common man has the first brush with the police. Any problem, he goes to the police. If the police have to be insulated from political pressures, they need to have some security of tenure so that they can't be posted at the whims and fancies of the State. 

One of the single benches was hearing an application of an accused for release on bail. He was accused in a case under Section 376 of IPC. During the hearing of his case, the complainant’s counsel pointed out that he has sent a video from the jail to the complainant that he's dancing and having a good time. The judge took it seriously and asked how could a video be made in a jail and then sent to the victim. She took suo motu notice and made it a PIL and referred it to the Chief Justice.

The Chief Justice was kind enough to send it to me. At that time, the television interview of this criminal [Lawrence Bishnoi] was also in the news. It had generated about millions of likes...We immediately took notice. We don't want such role models for our children. So this was basically meant to prevent the glamorisation of crimes. 

SA: Do suo motu actions in criminal matters sometimes lead to unintended consequences?

Justice Grewal: We can't shut our eyes to issues. Because, see the courts are the last resort. If such an incident comes up, it is the duty of the court also to take cognizance. In public interest, it is necessary and the early you do it, the better it is. It depends on the situation and the kind of cases. This power is not to be lightly exercised.

SA: Back in 2019, you dealt with the legality of the Dhingra Commission report, declared it invalid and even disagreed with Justice AK Mittal on one aspect. How much pressure does a high profile matter put on a Bench?

Justice Grewal: No, no pressure at all.  We have to go by the facts of each case. We are not to be swayed by the media coverage. We have to basically independently decide the cases as per the facts.

SA: How important are dissents?

Justice Grewal: It is necessary for a judge to dissent if he feels in a case that the decision should be in that manner, but the senior partner is of different view. Lots of future laws have been laid down by dissents.

SA: You dealt with bail petitions of many accused UAPA cases. What is your view about the stringent conditions of bail in these special enactments?

Justice Grewal: There are conditions but it [bail] has to depend on the factual situations.

In fact, there was one case of a lady. She was the wife of the accused, she had also been made an accused. The only allegation was that the husband brought a packet, handed over the packet and she kept it...She was in custody for maybe a couple of years. We had told Punjab government also...because in UAPA, if you are going to make a person an accused, you need to have some prima facie material. 

But if there is some material - you are getting arms and ammunition or pointing to some conspiracy, some cogent materials - then of course, it's a serious matter. 

It is our duty to ensure that speedy trial is there for all the accused in terms of Article 21...courts have to see the material against the accused and accordingly take a call. Just because he's involved in a stringent offence or just because the provisions of UAPA have been involved, that should not deter the courts from examining the matter and granting bail. There have been a lot of trial courts also in Punjab, they have been granting bail in the UAPA cases.

SA: What are your views on the use of AI and live streaming of proceedings?

Justice Grewal: We have been using AI...We had been using it at least to get the case summary of the matters. The petitions are 500 pages and the list of dates and events is there. The AI notes were coming in quite handy. It can sum up the entire thing. But there could be some errors. And for a cursory glance and having an idea of the entire matter, AI was of good use to us, but you can't entirely rely on it.

I'm quite open to live-streaming. I have no problem, but at times what happens is a lot of people just take you for granted. Somebody is traveling in a car...

SA: Does reporting on live-streamed matters make judges conscious of what they say in court?

Justice Grewal: Sometimes, when we speak, we are giving a prima facie opinion on the facts of the case and we are open to change. We should be able to speak to lawyers; they should know what is on our mind and accordingly respond. But when some observations are taken out of context, it is not in the interests of administration of justice. Some stray lines uttered by judges have been picked up and portrayed as the outcome of the case. Some regulation could be there.

SA: The Supreme Court recently took a serious view of certain portions about judicial corruption in a book published by the NCERT.  As a judge, you did not shy away from taking action against judicial corruption or even impropriety or misconduct. Should the judiciary hide from the fact that corruption exists in the judiciary?

Justice Grewal: We have our internal mechanism and it is quite strong. There is a tendency though that when a judgment is rendered by any judge in the district judiciary, many false complaints are filed since it goes against one party. So we have to be very careful and cautious while examining those complaints. We have to ensure that judges who are doing their job honestly and efficiently are not unnecessarily harassed. 

I think it's difficult for me to comment on this [NCERT case] because the Supreme Court is already seized of the matter. We have a very strong internal mechanism at the High Court level to deal with complaints. We have a vigilance committee. I headed that vigilance and discipline committee also. We have taken action against many judicial officers. 

SA: The reality is there is corruption...

Justice Grewal: There could be because we (judges) are from the same society. But I can tell you that the judiciary is much better than other institutions – bureaucracy, police and other wings. We are far better and the testimony to this is the increasing number of cases being filed. People have faith in the system.

SA: Many judges have transitioned into politics after retirement. Do you think this affects the image of the judiciary?

Justice Grewal: No. In fact, the first judge of a High Court who went on to become Chief Minister was from Punjab - Justice Gurnam Singh. He was respected both as a judge and as Chief Minister. But now, times have changed - it is difficult for judges to get into politics. Like they say - judges are men of classes and politicians represent the masses.

It is their own individual choice to enter politics.

SA: How do you feel after retirement? Is a judge’s job too stressful?

Justice Grewal: I am quite satisfied and relieved that now I will have a lot of time to reflect upon my life and see about other things which I could not do that time. Of course, I will try to be as useful to society as possible. I will try and give back what I have learned. 

A judge's job is very stressful. The sheer volume of cases is enormous. When I was a lawyer, there were not too many cases before the judges. You would see quite a few division benches; after lunch, they would not work.

But now, in fact, we are disposing of more cases than are being filed, which indicates the tremendous faith the public has in the justice delivery system. But the arrears and all of the past are staring at us. So that is a challenge for the High Court.

We have to keep ourselves fit because there are some inherent problems. No matter what, you are going to have long sitting hours and all of us have occupational hazards like back pain, neck pain. 

I was playing golf but it took a backseat when I was elevated. Even when I joined the Advocate General office also, it wasn't that often as I could play earlier...

...Now, I'm really looking forward to it. I'll try and play at a competitive level if time permits.