With great protocol facility comes great responsibility: CJI’s letter to high court chief justices

A letter from the Chief Justice of India Dr D.Y. Chandrachud to all high court chief justices avers that protocol services available to judges should not be used in a manner that is liable to result in inconvenience to others or to attract public criticism of the judiciary. The letter also underlines the need for self-reflection and counselling within the judiciary.

—

THE Chief Justice of India (CJI) has written to chief justices of all high courts underlining that the protocol "facilities" which are made available to judges should not be utilised to assert a claim to privilege which sets them apart from society or as a manifestation of power or authority.

The letter comes in the backdrop of the directions issued by the registrar of the Allahabad High Court on receiving directions from a judge of the high court.

Justice Dr Gautam Chowdhary was travelling from New Delhi to Prayagraj with his spouse on July 8. The train was late by more than three hours. 

On July 14, having received directions from the judge, the registrar of the high court wrote to the general manager, North Central Railways, Prayagraj, asking him to demand an explanation from the concerned officials.

The letter by the registrar stated that "in spite of repeated intimation to the travelling ticket examiner (TTE) no GRP personnel were found in the coach to meet the requirements as desired by his Lordship."

Disapproving of the directions issued at the behest of the high court judge, CJI Dr D.Y. Chandrachud has stated that they caused justifiable disquiet both within and outside the judiciary.

"Protocol services available to judges should not be used in a manner that is liable to result in inconvenience to others or to attract public criticism of the judiciary," the CJI writes in his letter to chief justices of high courts.

A wise exercise of judicial authority, both on and off the Bench, is what sustains the credibility and legitimacy of the judiciary and the confidence that society has in its judges, the CJI states in his letter.

The CJI's letter also questioned the authority of the high court judge to seek an explanation from railways since a high court judge does not possess disciplinary jurisdiction over railway personnel. 

"There was no occasion for an officer of the high court to call for an explanation from the railway personnel 'to be placed before His Lordship for kind perusal'." 

Evidently, the officer of the high court in the communication made to the North Central Railways was carrying out a direction of the judge of the high court in this instance, the letter of the CJI reads.

The CJI has requested chief justices of high courts to share his concerns with all colleagues across the high courts, adding that self-reflection and counselling within the judiciary is necessary.