Justice Jayachandran should have avoided commenting about Justice Swaminathan: Supreme Court

Supreme Court advises Madras High Court judge to avoid harsh observations, grants interim bail in YouTuber detention case.

The Supreme Court has observed that Justice G. Jayachandran of the Madras High Court should have avoided making harsh observations against Justice G.R. Swaminathan while passing orders in June this year in a case challenging YouTuber Savukku Shankar’s detention under the Goondas Act.

A two judge Bench of Justices Shudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah wrote: “The learned judge of the High Court has made some observations on his brother judge which should have been best avoided. It is always necessary for us to remember the distinction between judging and [being] judgemental.”

The Bench wrote so while disposing of a special leave petition (SLP) filed by the YouTuber’s mother A. Kamala against the orders passed by Justice Jayachandran as well as the consequent decision taken by a Division Bench of Justices M.S. Ramesh and Sunder Mohan to not accord an out of turn hearing of her case challenging the detention.

The Supreme Court disposed of the SLP after recording the submissions of senior counsel Siddharth Dave, representing the petitioner, as well as senior counsel Sidharth Luthra representing Tamil Nadu government, that they shall make a joint request before the Bench led by Justice Ramesh for an expeditious disposal of the petitioner’s case.

“We too request the High Court to expedite the hearing in the matter considering that it relates to preventive detention. As we have referred above, we say nothing on the merits of the case since the High Court is seized of the matter,” the judges said. They also granted interim bail to the detainee on furnishing two sureties of ₹50,000 each.

Before parting with the SLP, the Supreme Court sounded a note of caution against one judge of the High Court commenting about another judge. A habeas corpus petition (HCP)  filed by the YouTuber’s mother challenging his detention had initially led to a split verdict between Justices Swaminathan and P.B. Balaji on May 24 this year.

While Justice Swaminathan quashed the detention order, Justice Balaji felt that an opportunity must be given to the State to file its counter affidavit before taking any decision on the issue. Justice Jayachandran, appointed as a third judge to break the tie, agreed with the view taken by Justice Balaji and criticised Justice Swaminathan.