Thanking SCBA and SCAORA for Skipping Justice Bela M. Trivedi’s Farewell: A Stand for Judicial Integrity

Thanking SCBA and SCAORA for Skipping Justice Bela M. Trivedi’s Farewell: A Stand for Judicial Integrity 


Thanking SCBA and SCAORA for Skipping Justice Bela M. Trivedi’s Farewell: A Stand for Judicial Integrity

Posted on 18th May, 2025 (GMT 21:26 hrs)

ABSTRACT

The article expresses gratitude to the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) for their decision to forgo the farewell ceremony for Justice Bela M. Trivedi on May 16, 2025, viewing it as a principled stance for judicial integrity. It critiques Justice Trivedi for her rulings perceived to favor the ruling BJP and the executive branch, with particular emphasis on her involvement in the DHFL case. While Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai conveyed disappointment over the lack of a formal farewell, the article lauds the boycott as a courageous protest against the increasing politicization (or rather, Saffronization) of the judiciary over the past few years and a vital defense of constitutional values aimed at maintaining the separation between the political executive and the “impartial” judiciary.

To

The Distinguished Members and Dignitaries of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA)

To

The Distinguished Members and Dignitaries of the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA)

Subject: Gratitude for Upholding Principle by Skipping Justice Bela M. Trivedi’s Farewell Ceremony

Dear Esteemed Members of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA),

In a nation where the wall between judiciary and executive grows perilously thin, your decision to forego the customary farewell ceremony for Justice Bela M. Trivedi on May 16, 2025, stands as a clarion call for accountability. On behalf of those who cherish India’s constitutional soul, I extend heartfelt gratitude for your bold, principled stand—a silent yet thunderous protest against the creeping saffronization of justice. Your action resonates as a Gandhian act of nonviolent defiance, simultaneously echoing Ambedkar’s politico-philosophical ideology.

Justice Trivedi’s tenure, marked by rulings perceived to favour the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), raises grave questions about the current state of judicial impartiality or neutrality in India. Her alleged alignment with executive interests, including her handling of the DHFL case and other decisions that shielded governmental overreach, suggests a quest for post-retirement sinecures.

In 2025, with India’s democracy strained by executive dominance—evident in the blurred lines between New Delhi’s corridors and the Supreme Court’s hallowed benches—your refusal to honour tradition is not a snub but a safeguard. It signals that the Bar will not normalize judges who, as alleged, “lick the shoes of the ruling party” for personal gain.

Dear SCBA and SCAORA, your politically correct choice, though met with Chief Justice B.R. Gavai’s disapproval, reflects the Bar’s spine, as lauded by senior advocate Raju Ramachandran. Tradition is sacred, but not when it cloaks compromise with the ruling establishment. Justice Trivedi’s strict stance against advocates—ordering CBI probes for alleged misconduct and suspending an Advocate-on-Record, DHFL ruling—may have sparked this rift, but the deeper wound is her perceived partisanship. By withholding the farewell, you have upheld the judiciary’s dignity, refusing to fête a judge whose legacy, as critics argue, tilts toward saffron over constitutionalism.

This act aligns with the global struggle for justice, where power -structure seeks to bend the face of justice and truth. We thank you for reminding the legal fraternity that integrity, not ceremony, defines our republic. May your courage inspire law students, advocates, and at large common citizens to rebuild the wall between judiciary and executive, brick by brick, for a just India.

With profound respect and solidarity,

A Few Advocates of Justice and Peace; Otherwise, the Ordinary Citizens of India


Appendix

The Systemic Saffronization of India’s Judiciary, the DHFL Scandal, and the NHRC’s Global Shame

The SCBA and SCAORA’s principled boycott of Justice Bela M. Trivedi’s farewell ceremony on May 16, 2025, gains profound weight against the backdrop of a disturbing trend: numerous Indian judges, particularly from the Supreme Court, are accused of aligning with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to secure post-retirement appointments, eroding judicial independence. This pattern is exemplified in the mishandling of the DHFL case and broader human rights failures, where judges like Ranjan Gogoi, former CJI DY Chandrachud, Arun Mishra, and others allegedly prioritized executive favor over constitutional duty. Compounding this, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) faces international disgrace, with the UN-linked Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) recommending a downgrade of its accreditation from ‘A’ to ‘B’ status in March 2025, a matter of shame for Indian citizens. The action taken by SCBA and SCAORA stands as a bulwark against this saffronized judiciary and faltering human rights framework, protecting India’s democratic soul.

Post-Retirement Appointments: Key Cases of Complicity

  • Justice Ranjan Gogoi: Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Gogoi, who delivered the 2019 Ram Mandir verdict favoring Hindu claimants, was nominated to the Rajya Sabha in 2020, months after retiring. Critics argue this rewarded rulings aligned with BJP’s Hindutva agenda, including Article 370’s abrogation and the DHFL case’s questionable handling, which shielded corporate interests linked to the ruling party. His swift political appointment blurred judiciary-executive lines, undermining public trust.
  • Justice Arun Mishra: Retiring in 2020, Mishra was appointed chairperson of the NHRC. His tenure saw rulings perceived as pro-BJP, notably in cases involving BJP leaders and the DHFL scam, where victims allege judicial inaction protected crony capitalists. Once in a Blue Moon Academia labels his NHRC role a reward for loyalty, part of a saffronized trend.web:3,web:10
  • Justice Raghvendra Singh Chauhan: As Chief Justice of the Uttarakhand High Court, Chauhan received post-retirement appointments, which critics tie to his pro-BJP judicial stance. His role in cases favoring the executive exemplifies the lure of post-retirement perks, compromising impartiality.web:3
  • Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari: After serving as Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, Bhandari secured a post-retirement position, raising concerns about judicial independence. Critics question whether such appointments incentivize judges to align with the executive, as seen in his tenure’s favorable rulings.web:3
  • Justice S. Abdul Nazeer: Post-retirement in 2023, Nazeer was appointed Governor of Andhra Pradesh, following rulings in the Ayodhya and Article 370 cases that aligned with BJP interests. His appointment, like Gogoi’s, is cited as evidence of judges trading impartiality for executive rewards.web:9

The DHFL Case: A Symptom of Judicial Saffronization

The Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL) scam, involving ₹66,000 crore in alleged fraud, epitomizes judicial failure under a saffronized judiciary. Justice Trivedi’s bench, alongside others, allegedly stalled justice for lakhs of innocent victims, favouring corporate entities like Piramal Group, linked to BJP interests. The Supreme Court’s April 2025 ruling dismissed victims’ pleas, ignoring evidence of financial abuse by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Committee of Creditors (CoC). Three 2022 NHRC complaints highlight the RBI and CoC’s role in victimizing small depositors, yet the judiciary, including Trivedi, failed to act, allegedly to protect BJP-backed corporates. An open letter to NHRC’s Justice V. Ramasubramanian in January 2025 accused the judiciary of silence, reinforcing claims of a saffronized bench shielding executive allies. The DHFL victims’ struggle, described as a “united front” in April 2025, mirrors global fights against systemic injustice.

Systemic Judicial Failures

  • Saffronization and Theocracy: The judiciary’s drift toward a “theocratic” model, as warned in a 2024 article, sees judges like Gogoi, Chandrachud, Mishra, and Trivedi favoring Hindutva-driven cases (e.g., Gyanvapi mosque, Ayodhya). This aligns with BJP’s agenda, with post-retirement roles as incentives. Widespread “saffronization” is thereby observed in rulings that legitimize majoritarian narratives, eroding secular constitutionalism.
  • Legitimation Crisis: Public trust is collapsing due to judges prioritizing careerist ambitions over their professional duty. Post-retirement appointments, like Gogoi’s Rajya Sabha seat, fuel perceptions of a judiciary beholden to the executive, as seen in delayed human rights cases.web:5
  • Human Rights Failures: Another observable issue is the judiciary’s stark silence on human rights abuses, including rampant arrests of youth and other activists, custodial murders/deaths and minority persecution, under judges influenced by saffron ideology. The NHRC, led by figures like Mishra, has failed to address DHFL victims’ financial abuse, reflecting a broader judicial abdication.
  • Delayed Justice: The judiciary’s backlog, exacerbated by judges like Trivedi, whose benches allegedly delayed DHFL hearings to favour corporate interests, is another area of concern. This systemic inefficiency, tied to executive influence, denies justice to the marginalized.

The NHRC’s Global Shame: GANHRI’s Downgrade Recommendation

Adding to India’s institutional crisis, the NHRC faces international disgrace following the GANHRI Sub-Committee on Accreditation’s March 2025 recommendation to downgrade its accreditation from ‘A’ to ‘B’ status, a historic first. This decision stems from the NHRC’s failure to comply with the Paris Principles, which mandate independence, pluralism, and effectiveness in human rights bodies. Key concerns include: the involvement of police officers in investigations, creating conflicts of interest; government control over appointing senior civil servants as secretary general; and lack of diversity in NHRC’s composition, excluding Dalits, Adivasis, and religious minorities. The NHRC’s inaction on critical issues—Manipur’s violence, Jammu and Kashmir’s detentions, and the DHFL victims’ financial abuse—further justifies this downgrade.web:8,web:17

The downgrade, if finalized in 2026, could strip India’s NHRC of voting rights at the UN Human Rights Council, a profound embarrassment for Indian citizens. Posts on X reflect public outrage, with users like @ShashiTharoor calling it a “shame” and @SaketGokhale linking it to BJP’s appointment of “Modi bhakts” like Arun Mishra as NHRC chair. This crisis, tied to the same executive overreach seen in judicial appointments, underscores the urgency of your boycott. The NHRC’s failure mirrors the judiciary’s saffronization, where institutions meant to protect citizens serve the ruling party instead.

Relevance to SCBA and SCAORA’s Boycott

The SCBA and SCAORA’s boycott of Trivedi’s farewell is a courageous rejection of this saffronized judiciary and faltering NHRC. By refusing to honor a judge accused of executive bias, you challenge the culture of post-retirement rewards that taints justices like Gogoi, Mishra, Chauhan, Bhandari, and Nazeer. The DHFL case, mishandled under Trivedi’s watch, and the NHRC’s impending downgrade underscore the stakes: institutions that shield crony capitalism and ignore human rights betray India’s poor. safeguarding the judiciary from becoming a tool of BJP’s Hindutva governance. SCBA and SCAORA’s Boycott lays bare the truth, inspiring citizens to demand a judiciary and NHRC that serve the Constitution, not the executive.

Post-Script

Sacks of Cash and Judicial Farce

Oh, what a splendid encore to India’s judicial saga! As if saffronized benches and NHRC’s global disgrace weren’t enough, Certain reports regale us with a tale straight from a Bollywood caper: “sacks of cash” stashed at a judge’s residence, uncovered in a 2024 report by Delhi’s Chief Justice Manmohan. The Supreme Court, in a rare burst of transparency, published this gem, patting itself on the back for “ethical strides” under CJI Sanjiv Khanna.. Alas, the report raises more questions than it answers—where did these mysterious sacks come from, and why does the judiciary’s response feel like a magician’s sleight of hand? In a nation where judges like Trivedi allegedly court post-retirement perks, one wonders if these cash sacks were merely props in a grander farce, with the executive directing the script. Dear SCBA and SCAORA, your boycott of Trivedi’s farewell shines even brighter against this absurd backdrop—here’s to dodging the glitter of tainted traditions!

Cash found at Delhi HC judge’s residence: CJI seeks details of guards at Judge Yashwant Varma’s house VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on March 24, 2025 ©The Hindu)   

   

References

Disclaimer

This letter, including its appendix and post-script, expresses opinions and perspectives based on publicly available sources cited herein. The views articulated are intended for public discourse and academic discussion within the framework of free expression, and do not constitute legal, factual, or definitive judgments. Allegations regarding judicial conduct, institutional practices, or related matters reflect the critiques of the cited sources and are not presented as proven facts. Readers are encouraged to independently verify all claims and consult primary sources or legal authorities for accurate information. The author assumes no liability for any legal, professional, or personal consequences arising from the use, interpretation, or dissemination of this letter. This document is not intended to defame, malign, or prejudice any individual, institution, or ongoing legal proceedings, and should not be constr

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mr. Ajay Piramal: Grand Philanthropism or Profiteering Facade?

Image
 Mr. Ajay Piramal: Grand Philanthropism or Profiteering Facade? Mr. Ajay Piramal: Grand Philanthropism or Profiteering Facade? Posted on 3rd May, 2025 (GMT 21:20 hrs) ABSTRACT The article critically examines the philanthropic image of Ajay Piramal, chairman of the Piramal Group. While reflecting on his supposedly projected contributions through the Piramal Foundation in areas like healthcare, education, and clean water initiatives, the article raises concerns about alleged financial misconduct and environmental extortion issues associated with his business practices over the years that seem to posit a crony collusion. It questions whether his philanthropic endeavours serve as a genuine commitment to social welfare or as a means to obscure less ethical corporate activities. The piece encourages readers to scrutinize the alignment between Piramal’s professed values and his business operations, suggesting a need for greater genunity in viewing a philanthro-capitalist! I. Introduc...
Read more

The Shadow of Quora: Why Once in a Blue Moon Academia Faces a Singular Blockade?

Image
 The Shadow of Quora: Why Once in a Blue Moon Academia Faces a Singular Blockade? The Shadow of Quora: Why Once in a Blue Moon Academia Faces a Singular Blockade? Posted on 1st May, 2025 (GMT 06:23 hrs) Abstract Once in a Blue Moon Academia (OBMA), a digital movement advocating for justice and transparency, thrives across platforms like WordPress, Google Sites, and YouTube, yet faces a unique blockade from Quora. This article explores Quora’s darker side—its inconsistent moderation, echo chambers, data breaches, and censorship—revealing how these flaws mirror OBMA’s broader fight against systemic oppression, including the Piramal Group’s influence in the #DHFL_Scam. From  https://onceinabluemoon2021.in/  to its global digital presence, OBMA’s struggle underscores the tension between digital gatekeeping and the quest for free expression, urging readers to join the battle for a more open internet. #Seize_Cronies_Fairplay_for_DHFL_Victims, #Restore_Freedom_of_Speech_and...
Read more

Justice via Intimidation? A Financially Abused Citizen vs. the Corporate-State Nexus

Image
  Justice via Intimidation? A Financially Abused Citizen vs. the Corporate-State Nexus Response/Statement from a DHFL Victim Harassed by Mr. Piramal’s Legal Machinery,  Intended as an Open Communication (as expected in democracy) to the Hon’ble Bombay High Court  Regarding Case Number S/42/2025 (and connected matters). Posted on 30th June, 2025 (GMT 23:01 hrs) ABSTRACT The author of this open communication to the Hon’ble Bombay High is a victim of the DHFL financial scandal. He reports receiving a Bombay High Court suit (No. 42 of March 17, 2025) unusually via the Mumbai Sheriff, which contained identity errors, redundant or blank pages, and a mere five‑day response window, compared to the 90 days apparently allotted to corporate plaintiff Mr. Ajay Piramal. He argues that this situation appears to constitute legal intimidation by a powerful corporate‑state nexus that has left him impoverished and unable to secure counsel within such a short temporal window. He highli...
Read more