Reporting corrupt judges who had friends in high places to CJI resulted in my transfer: Justice Sanjib Banerjee [Part I]

Former Chief Justice of the High Courts of Meghalaya and Madras Sanjib Banerjee retired from office on November 1, 2023. Known for being an outspoken judge, he often held authorities accountable in matters involving larger public interest - and seemingly paid a price for doing so..One such episode that caught the public eye was his transfer from the Madras High Court to the Meghalaya High Court in the wake of his comments on the Election Commission of India during a hearing.But he reveals that this incident wasn't the reason for his transfer to Meghalaya.In the first of this two-part interview with Bar & Bench’s Aamir Khan, Banerjee for the first time opens up on “the real reason” behind his transfer, driving his own car as a judge, his thoughts on not making it to the Supreme Court, and much more..Edited excerpts follow..Aamir (AK): How has been life post judgeship? Do you hold any regrets for not making it to the Supreme Court?.Justice Sanjib Banerjee (SB): It’s been slightly lonely and difficult. Two reasons for that. One is of my own doing because I relocated to Delhi. Delhi has not been where I've ever stayed. That is why I could be slightly feeling lonely. .No regrets because once you become a judge, you should not have ambitionJustice Sanjib Banerjee.No regrets because once you become a judge, you should not have ambition; that really is something which pulls you down because some of your decision making process gets affected by it.I really enjoyed my stint in Meghalaya. I went to Meghalaya without any qualms, without any regret. I am fortunate for having had the opportunity to serve Meghalaya. There was a lot of work to be done and I think some of it was done - including setting up a National Law University - in probably six or eight months.So, no regrets. Just that I feel slightly bad that my peers did not find me worthy enough. That’s it. That rankles a bit, but there's no regret. .AK: What were the early days of your practice like? .SB: I came through a legal education process that was completely non-existent. I hardly had to attend any class because the education system in Bengal in general and the legal education system were in a state of anarchy. I even had to take one of my exams by climbing a pipe and getting into the examination hall. All that I learned about law was after I got a degree. Of course, since I wanted to get into the profession, I diligently studied the course and I don't even know how the marking was done. .I still don't know why I passed and the next guy failed. It was a real tic-tac-toe kind of a situation where I got through and all the learning was once you got to court. You had a license before you knew how to drive, so to say and all the learning was in court. But I was very lucky. I had a senior, Sudipto Sarkar, a barrister who later became a Senior Advocate, and who was an absolute authority on civil and commercial law. He, and consequently I, practiced on the Original Side of the Calcutta High Court.And what I learned from him was without him ever expressly telling me was that everyone wants to know the law from text books and bare acts. But, you really get to understand the law if you know why is it the law. That kind of an education was very good for the first three years or so of becoming a lawyer..I really didn’t do anything else but attend his chambers in the evening and follow his coattails in court. It was a time of complete dedication and learning. That may have helped me later because as a judge, I won't be modest, I was pretty decisive. I was very quick. I never delivered a judgment more than four days after I reserved it. Never in my career.Whenever I reserved a judgment - which was not very often - I would indicate the date and time that I would pronounce judgment, and I have never failed it. I was very happy to dictate judgments in court immediately after a matter was over, however heavy the matter was.But when I saw that my dictation time would exceed by half-an-hour or so, I thought it was not prudent to waste court time. It was then only that I would reserve a judgment..Otherwise, more often than not, it was easier for me to dictate in court, because in court there are two advantages.Firstly, you are much more precise when you are dictating in court. And secondly, it is a very fair process because the lawyers are sitting in front of you. If you missed a point, or if you missed a judgment that they've cited, they'll stand up and say, why did you not do that? In a way, it's much more difficult, but I found it easier to dictate in court because the matter was fresh in my mind. .AK: What prompted you to take up judgeship? .SB: In our college days in Calcutta, we discussed world politics and everything. And we would, in the course of our discussions, which are in Calcutta called adda, try and solve all the problems of the world. And every student, seeing the kind of inequalities all around would start think, how do we remove the inequalities? So you would have some kind of a left bent of thought and when we were engaged in those addas, we thought that when it comes to us, we will try and reform. .When the opportunity (for judgeship) came, I lost a whole lot of my income, but found myself saying yes. However, later, owing to the delay, I wrote a letter saying I was no longer willing, but it was not accepted by Chief Justice (VS) Sirpurkar, who can tell you a story over half-a-day of how he convinced me to be a judge..And then the number two judge in the country, Justice Ruma Pal, called me and she said that she wanted to advertise the position of judgeship if someone like me took it up. A lot of judges who come from the Bar will tell you how much income they've had to give up. But most of them are stories.There are several who've given up a lot of the income and from successful practices have become judges, but some of them would be because their fathers were judges or things like that, but you don't find too many who would have given up the kind of income that I did to become a judge..Once I became a judge, I completely secluded myself. For nearly 17-and-a-half years, I never attended any private function, weddings or any invitations of that kind. Never went to a hotel or restaurant, despite the kind of lifestyle that we had before. So there's a lot of sacrifice that the family of a judge has to make because of the fallen income. Because if you become a judge at age 45, 46, or around that time, you would have already been established.You would already be used to a kind of lifestyle, a kind of income, and with children, the education costing as much as it does now, or even when our children went for higher education, it’s a difficult decision. .At the end of my first month when I got a check for ₹66,000, I had tears rolling down my cheeks, because I didn't realise what kind of penury I had forced my family to get into. But things improved with the Pay Commission. When I started, the basic pay was ₹27,000, and when I ended as Chief Justice, the basic pay was ₹2.50 lakh with dearness allowance of 46%. It was a huge difference, but still compared to what one could have done as a lawyer, you don’t do half or a tenth as much as a judge..AK: What was your most challenging assignment?.SB: I never found judgeship to be challenging. It was very rewarding, very satisfying. Two things you must remember. Justicing is not doing a divine act. It's a constitutional duty. It's just another job. So you can't take yourself too seriously. Number two, more people take up judgeship because of the perks of office. And by perks of office, I don't mean the monetary perks, but the power that comes with it. When I was a judge for the first 10 years, we were entitled to red lights. I never used a red light on my car. Then you were always used to entitled to fly a flag on your car. I never used a flag on my car.It was only when I became Chief Justice that I wasn't driving, otherwise, throughout my life as a judge, I drove my own car..I've never had any sign of power. I would obey all traffic signals and rules. Even as Chief Justice, despite a convoy and despite pilots taking you everywhere, I would try to tell them not to break rules to the extent possible. Not to inconvenience others.Those things are downright rude. You can leave five minutes early and reach on time rather than making a show of your power of office.A lot of people have difficulty in transitioning after retirement because all those things go. As a Chief Justice, you go through security without being frisked at the airport. Your luggage is not checked. Now, once you demit office, you become an ordinary citizen. It's difficult for many people to get back to that way of life. And I've known several judges who've had real problems with it. Once you've been grounded, it does not affect you that much..AK: During a hearing at the Madras High Court, you made scathing remarks against the Election Commission in a case. Do you think the incident had a bearing on your transfer to Meghalaya?.SB: That was only the excuse that was allowed to gain currency. The reasons are much more serious and much more deep-rooted; that plagues the institution. The reason is that I found corrupt judges and I reported to my Chief Justice of India about the corrupt judges with evidence backing it up.Unfortunately, those corrupt judges had friends in high places that resulted in my transfer. That was the real reason. Not a commentary on the Election Commission. .AK: Do you think outspoken judges bear the brunt of speaking their mind?.SB: Not really. You see, a speaking judge is always good. Outspoken or not is a different thing. A speaking judge is always good because when a lawyer gets to know which way the judge is thinking, he can address the matter better. Judges should not make political comments.Judges should be restrained in what they say. Even though sometimes, in the middle of a heated argument, where the judge does not see the point, there is banter on both sides. Both from the Bar and the Bench. These are not things that are reported..Do I regret what I said about the Election Commission? I would say absolutely not. That body had become so partisan. I was later vindicated by Supreme Court judgment authored by Justice Joseph, which has still not been implemented to this day. Why? What is the meaning of democracy if the authority in charge of ensuring fairness and democracy, becomes partisan?.AK: Should the media report on oral observations made by a judge during hearings? .SB: I wouldn't blame the media. If that is something which the media finds relevant, it’s up to their judgment. But what I regret about the media is sometimes running to conclusions about matters which are still sub judice.I don't regret my comment having been splashed all over. But sometimes, the media goes overboard in how it deals with and reports on sensational matters. And there should be some kind of education over there, because the media is not privy to the evidence which is available.The court decides on evidence. The media just takes a couple of comments from here or there, takes a statement from some witness or another, and then comes to its own conclusions. Then, what's the use of a court or a judge? .Today, you find the media is hardly independent and the manner in which NDTV was taken over does not give confidence to any media house to remain independent.Justice Sanjib Banerjee.Sensationalism now probably sells, and which is why the media pings on to that. But there also has to be a degree of responsibility. The media is the fourth pillar.Today, you find the media is hardly independent and the manner in which NDTV was taken over does not give confidence to any media house to remain independent. .There are only one or two digital media houses at that, which really remain truthful. The other side of it is that, if courts do not come to the rescue of honest journalists, then honest journalists would become extinct. Today, business models use defamation, both criminal defamation and the civil suits..If courts do not come to the rescue of honest journalists, then honest journalists would become extinct.Justice Sanjib Banerjee.And even before justification can be pleaded, warrants are issued and they are dragged to faraway courts to be harassed. Take the plight of Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, whose name finds mention in the Hindenburg Report. I am ashamed to be living in a country where such a journalist does not get the dignity that he deserves and is dragged from one corner of the country to another to be harassed because he reported based on facts. .In the next segment of the interview, Justice Banerjee shares his thoughts on the Collegium system of appointment and transfer of judges; the recent controversy that marred Calcutta High Court and more.