Former judges and bureaucrats call the Supreme Court’s comments on Nupur Sharma “outrageous and unfortunate.” 15 former judges, 77 former bureaucrats, and 25 retired military officers have criticized the Supreme Court’s recent remarks against Nupur Sharma, the BJP leader who has since been suspended after making remarks about the Prophet Mohammed that sparked protests and a diplomatic dispute. See here.
They claim that the supreme court went beyond “Laxman Rekha” and sought “urgent rectification” in an open letter to CJI NV Ramana. Notably, the Supreme Court criticized Nupur Sharma for her remarks about the Prophet Muhammad on July 1, saying they were upsetting and reeked of arrogance.
The SC bench had commented that it was too late for her to apologize for her remark against the Prophet Mohammad as it had caused horrific incidents.
An open letter to Chief Justice NV Ramana objecting to the observations made by Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala during the hearing of Nupur Sharma’s case in the Supreme Court has been sent. It is signed by retired judges, bureaucrats, and members of the armed forces.
It was requested in the letter that Justice Surya Kant’s name to be removed from the roster until he is superannuated or that he be instructed to retract his comments and observations from the Nupur Sharma case hearing.
The unfortunate remarks “have no parallel in the annals of the judiciary and are an irreparable stain on the justice system of the largest democracy,” the statement reads. This could seriously undermine democratic ideals and national security, calling for immediate corrective action.
On July 1, the Supreme Court harshly criticized Sharma for her contentious remarks about the Prophet Muhammad. She was said to be “solely responsible for what is going on in the country.” Her “loose tongue” has “lit the entire country on fire,” according to the honorable court.
The honorable court declined to hear her request for the clubbing of FIRs filed against her in various states in connection with the remark. The bench continued, claiming that the comments were made for cheap publicity, a political agenda, or some other nefarious purpose.
The statement, in response to the observations, stated, “We, as concerned citizens, believe that democracy in any country will stay intact until all institutions function in accordance with the constitution. Recent Supreme Court comments have transcended the Laxman Rekha and driven us to make an open statement. ”
These “unfortunate and unprecedented” comments, it claimed, have sent shockwaves throughout the country and beyond.
The statement further stated that the court’s observations had no jurisprudential connection with the issue raised in the petition and “transgressed in an unprecedented manner all canons of dispensation of justice.”
The statement claimed that she was “de facto denied access to the judiciary” and that this violated the preamble, spirit, and foundation of the Indian Constitution.
The observations virtually exonerate the “dastardliest beheading at Udaipur in broad daylight,” it claimed.
“In fact, it is alarming and worrying that certain observations have been made about other government agencies without their knowledge.” “The legal community is certain to be shocked and surprised by the assertion that a FIR should result in an arrest,” it continued.
The signatories also defended Sharma’s request that all FIRs against her be clubbed, citing previous Supreme Court orders.
The former BJP spokesperson, Nupur Sharma’s remarks about the Prophet during a TV debate sparked nationwide protests and drew harsh criticism from many Gulf countries.
She was subsequently expelled from the BJP for the alleged remarks.
