SC dimisses petition seeking to revive Anand's age issue

SC dimisses petition seeking to revive Anand's age issue
PRESS TRUST OF INDIA

NEW DLEHI, FEB 14: The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition by Madras High Court Advocate Association seeking to revive the controversy over Chief Justice of India A S Anand's age issue and has also asked the president of the lawyers' body to show cause why criminal proceedings be not initiated against him for making false averments in his affidavit.

A three-judge bench of Justice K T Thomas, Justice R P Sethi and Justice B N Agrawal dismissed the petition without issuing notice to respondents saying the age of Justice Anand was determined to be November 1, 1936 by the President of India as far back as 1991 and it has attained finality.

President of the Association R Karuppan, who had argued the petition in person, had alleged that the court should determine the age of Justice Anand as November 1, 1934 and declare that he has attained the age of superannuation.

Justice Thomas, who wrote the judgement for the bench, said despite asking repeatedly to show any document to prove that Justice Anand's date of birth was November 1, 1934, Karuppan could not "even produce a scrap of paper" to substantiate his allegations".

The bench termed the petition as "an abuse of the process of the court" and "a reckless action to malign the highest judiciary".

After dismissing the petition, the bench asked Karuppan to show cause by February 28 as to why criminal proceedings be not initiated against him under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code for making false averments in his affidavit.

The apex Court on December 15 had handed down a six month imprisonment sentence to Sundaram after convicting him of committing gross criminal contempt of court by sending a threatening telegram to the Chief Justice of India alleging that he had already attained the age of superannuation.

However, the sentence has been kept suspended for five years as the advocate has filed an affidavit apologising for his action and undertaking not to embark in future on any such misadventure.

The President in 1991, in consultation with the then CJI, had held that the date of birth of Justice Anand was November 1, 1936, the Bench had said.

Justice Thomas had said once the age issue was decided by the President, ``It was not open to this contemnor to raise this question over again and again.''

Justice Thomas had said, ``Chief Justice of India by virtue of his constitutional ranking is the head of the Indian judiciary. When threats of the above nature have been hurled at him they would unmistakably tend to undermine the position, majesty and dignity of the courts and the law.''

The division Bench had said before a person proposed to make an imputation on another, he should make an inquiry into the factum of the imputation. ``If he does not do so, he cannot claim that what he did was bonafide I.E done in good faith,'' he added.