Bar & Bench’s Aditya AK meets former judge of the Supreme Court, SN Phukan J..As soon as I enter Justice Phukan’s residence in Gauhati, he orders his attendants into action, and minutes after pleasantries are exchanged, I find plates of snacks and tea before me. He has a courteous demeanour about him, despite the fact that he has recently suffered a fracture on his leg. It feels like he has known me for ages, and he gives a whole new meaning to the term ‘uncle judge’..His grandfather, the first Indian district judge in Assam, clearly played a big role in his decision to pursue law and more specifically, to become a judge. And he is disappointed that his sons, both engineers, have not kept with the SN Phukan family tradition. His grandson, though, seems to have made amends by graduating from NLIU Bhopal..“I joined the Assam Judicial Services in 1963, two years after I enrolled. I didn’t really want to be a judge; I probably made a mistake by joining the Bench. Much later, I felt that I should have continued to practice. [But] when the offer to become a judge came, I took it up because it was my grandfather’s wish.”.Regret notwithstanding, he went on to become Chief Justice of three different High Courts – Gauhati (where he was the Acting Chief Justice), Himachal Pradesh and Orissa..“My motto was that when you go to a High Court as Chief Justice, you must get to know the people. For one month, I made it a point to meet all the court officers..At Himachal, Arun Jaitley came to my chamber one day saying that his case, which came before another bench was only part heard. Immediately, I got it listed for re-hearing..I had good relations with the government also. I used to meet the Chief Minister once a month at my house.”.Despite this tendency to maintain close relations with the government, he would take a stand against the state as Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court. In the widely publicised Anjana Mishra case, the state’s then Advocate General Indrajit Ray was accused of attempting to rape Mishra in 1997. Mishra also alleged that Chief Minister JB Patnaik was shielding the Advocate General. Later, in 1999, she was gang-raped by three assailants..When the matter came before Justice SN Phukan, he ordered a CBI inquiry into both matters..“I entrusted the investigation to the CBI because people did not have faith in the local police.”.As a consequence of the CBI’s findings, Ray was charged with three years’ imprisonment and the two assailants in the second rape were also convicted..Today, Justice SN Phukan is proud of the fact that the Supreme Court has two judges from the North-East (Gogoi and Roy JJ.), a region he feels has not been adequately represented in the higher judiciary. In fact, he himself had to fight for his rightful place in the apex court..When the time came for his elevation in 1999, he was shocked to learn that Justice Bhawani Singh of the Himachal Pradesh High Court was being considered instead. To set things straight, he wrote a letter to then President of India, KR Narayanan..“There was one judge who was junior to me, and he told that he was going to the Supreme Court. So I wrote a letter to the President saying that if I was not elevated, the people of the North-East will feel hurt.”.He had a largely uncontroversial tenure in the Supreme Court; it was only after retirement that the spotlight would fall on him..In 2003, he was appointed to form a Commission to conduct an inquiry into defence contracts entered into during the Kargil War. Former Defence Minister, George Fernandes, was facing serious allegations regarding these contracts..The post was the proverbial poisoned chalice; before Justice SN Phukan, another Supreme Court judge, Justice Venkataswami had resigned from the probe amidst allegations that he had taken up two government posts at the same time..The responsibility was then cast on Justice SN Phukan, who drew immense criticism for exonerating Fernandes in an initial report. The report was boycotted by the UPA government. However, to this day, he feels that he wasn’t allowed the chance to conduct the investigation the way he wanted to..“People do not know what actually happened. There are two aspects – one is the defence deals and the other is the taking of bribes by the politicians. My predecessor [Justice] Venkataswami identified certain defence deals in Pune. I gave my verdict only on the defence deals, based on the evidence on record..The Tehelka tapes were related to the second aspect, on which I wasn’t allowed to give my verdict, due to political reasons. I never said George Fernandes was innocent.”.There were also reports of him taking a trip with his wife sponsored by the Defence Ministry while conducting the probe. It was a trip that reportedly cost the exchequer close to Rs. 1 crore. He is adamant that the facilities offered were “not good”. In fact, he claims to have saved the tax payers’ money..“All the defence equipment that had been purchased had to be inspected. They offered to bring all of the equipment to Delhi so that it could be inspected by me and my team of lawyers, but it would have cost the Government too much, so I decided to go..The only thing was that I took my wife, and that was only for one reason – I am very protective.”.At this juncture, he winces and shifts his foot onto a stool. Clearly in pain, he calls for one of his boys to bring him his medicine. He then takes a moment to reminisce about his late wife, acknowledging the important role she played in his career..“In one way, the credit goes to my wife. She was very strict; she wouldn’t let me watch news channels!.Even if you have the most remote relation to either party or an interest in the matter, you should stay away from the case. That is how impartiality is maintained. A judge’s life belongs in court; it creates an atmosphere such that you cannot be influenced by outside factors.”.For a while, he stares into the distance, perhaps remembering his days at the apex court. Once he gathers his thoughts, he points to a picture on the wall he was given to mark the golden jubilee of the Supreme Court..He feels honoured to have sat with judges such as Justice Arijit Pasayat..He believes that the Supreme Court has brilliant judges even today, and he urges them to keep in mind the integrity of the institution..“My only advice would be to keep the flag of the judiciary flying high, do not degrade its image. It is the only institution in India that people are happy about. But that is also changing, because of delay in justice. People don’t want to go to courts as a result.”.So what are his solutions to pendency and speedy disposal of cases?.“This can be done by introducing more courts, something on the lines of the Sadr Diwani Adalats of the pre-independence era. There should also be more Lok Adalats and promotion of ADR methods. Further, a Commissioner should be appointed for taking evidence, instead of the court taking evidence..In the Supreme Court, in order to deal with pendency, there should be a bigger Bench, and admission of cases should be restricted.”.And with that, the conversation meanders; it is clearly time to leave the ailing septuagenarian to rest..On the way back from his residence, the cab driver is in awe of my having met such a “great man”. I receive a similar response from lawyers at the Gauhati High Court, for whom Justice SN Phukan will always be a source of pride.
Bar & Bench’s Aditya AK meets former judge of the Supreme Court, SN Phukan J..As soon as I enter Justice Phukan’s residence in Gauhati, he orders his attendants into action, and minutes after pleasantries are exchanged, I find plates of snacks and tea before me. He has a courteous demeanour about him, despite the fact that he has recently suffered a fracture on his leg. It feels like he has known me for ages, and he gives a whole new meaning to the term ‘uncle judge’..His grandfather, the first Indian district judge in Assam, clearly played a big role in his decision to pursue law and more specifically, to become a judge. And he is disappointed that his sons, both engineers, have not kept with the SN Phukan family tradition. His grandson, though, seems to have made amends by graduating from NLIU Bhopal..“I joined the Assam Judicial Services in 1963, two years after I enrolled. I didn’t really want to be a judge; I probably made a mistake by joining the Bench. Much later, I felt that I should have continued to practice. [But] when the offer to become a judge came, I took it up because it was my grandfather’s wish.”.Regret notwithstanding, he went on to become Chief Justice of three different High Courts – Gauhati (where he was the Acting Chief Justice), Himachal Pradesh and Orissa..“My motto was that when you go to a High Court as Chief Justice, you must get to know the people. For one month, I made it a point to meet all the court officers..At Himachal, Arun Jaitley came to my chamber one day saying that his case, which came before another bench was only part heard. Immediately, I got it listed for re-hearing..I had good relations with the government also. I used to meet the Chief Minister once a month at my house.”.Despite this tendency to maintain close relations with the government, he would take a stand against the state as Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court. In the widely publicised Anjana Mishra case, the state’s then Advocate General Indrajit Ray was accused of attempting to rape Mishra in 1997. Mishra also alleged that Chief Minister JB Patnaik was shielding the Advocate General. Later, in 1999, she was gang-raped by three assailants..When the matter came before Justice SN Phukan, he ordered a CBI inquiry into both matters..“I entrusted the investigation to the CBI because people did not have faith in the local police.”.As a consequence of the CBI’s findings, Ray was charged with three years’ imprisonment and the two assailants in the second rape were also convicted..Today, Justice SN Phukan is proud of the fact that the Supreme Court has two judges from the North-East (Gogoi and Roy JJ.), a region he feels has not been adequately represented in the higher judiciary. In fact, he himself had to fight for his rightful place in the apex court..When the time came for his elevation in 1999, he was shocked to learn that Justice Bhawani Singh of the Himachal Pradesh High Court was being considered instead. To set things straight, he wrote a letter to then President of India, KR Narayanan..“There was one judge who was junior to me, and he told that he was going to the Supreme Court. So I wrote a letter to the President saying that if I was not elevated, the people of the North-East will feel hurt.”.He had a largely uncontroversial tenure in the Supreme Court; it was only after retirement that the spotlight would fall on him..In 2003, he was appointed to form a Commission to conduct an inquiry into defence contracts entered into during the Kargil War. Former Defence Minister, George Fernandes, was facing serious allegations regarding these contracts..The post was the proverbial poisoned chalice; before Justice SN Phukan, another Supreme Court judge, Justice Venkataswami had resigned from the probe amidst allegations that he had taken up two government posts at the same time..The responsibility was then cast on Justice SN Phukan, who drew immense criticism for exonerating Fernandes in an initial report. The report was boycotted by the UPA government. However, to this day, he feels that he wasn’t allowed the chance to conduct the investigation the way he wanted to..“People do not know what actually happened. There are two aspects – one is the defence deals and the other is the taking of bribes by the politicians. My predecessor [Justice] Venkataswami identified certain defence deals in Pune. I gave my verdict only on the defence deals, based on the evidence on record..The Tehelka tapes were related to the second aspect, on which I wasn’t allowed to give my verdict, due to political reasons. I never said George Fernandes was innocent.”.There were also reports of him taking a trip with his wife sponsored by the Defence Ministry while conducting the probe. It was a trip that reportedly cost the exchequer close to Rs. 1 crore. He is adamant that the facilities offered were “not good”. In fact, he claims to have saved the tax payers’ money..“All the defence equipment that had been purchased had to be inspected. They offered to bring all of the equipment to Delhi so that it could be inspected by me and my team of lawyers, but it would have cost the Government too much, so I decided to go..The only thing was that I took my wife, and that was only for one reason – I am very protective.”.At this juncture, he winces and shifts his foot onto a stool. Clearly in pain, he calls for one of his boys to bring him his medicine. He then takes a moment to reminisce about his late wife, acknowledging the important role she played in his career..“In one way, the credit goes to my wife. She was very strict; she wouldn’t let me watch news channels!.Even if you have the most remote relation to either party or an interest in the matter, you should stay away from the case. That is how impartiality is maintained. A judge’s life belongs in court; it creates an atmosphere such that you cannot be influenced by outside factors.”.For a while, he stares into the distance, perhaps remembering his days at the apex court. Once he gathers his thoughts, he points to a picture on the wall he was given to mark the golden jubilee of the Supreme Court..He feels honoured to have sat with judges such as Justice Arijit Pasayat..He believes that the Supreme Court has brilliant judges even today, and he urges them to keep in mind the integrity of the institution..“My only advice would be to keep the flag of the judiciary flying high, do not degrade its image. It is the only institution in India that people are happy about. But that is also changing, because of delay in justice. People don’t want to go to courts as a result.”.So what are his solutions to pendency and speedy disposal of cases?.“This can be done by introducing more courts, something on the lines of the Sadr Diwani Adalats of the pre-independence era. There should also be more Lok Adalats and promotion of ADR methods. Further, a Commissioner should be appointed for taking evidence, instead of the court taking evidence..In the Supreme Court, in order to deal with pendency, there should be a bigger Bench, and admission of cases should be restricted.”.And with that, the conversation meanders; it is clearly time to leave the ailing septuagenarian to rest..On the way back from his residence, the cab driver is in awe of my having met such a “great man”. I receive a similar response from lawyers at the Gauhati High Court, for whom Justice SN Phukan will always be a source of pride.
