Brief Bio-Data of the Next Chief Justice of India, Shri Justice P.
Sathasivam
Shri Justice P.
Sathasivam, to be sworn in as the 40th Chief
Justice of India on July19, 2013, was
born on 27thApril,
1949 in Kadappanallur Village of Bhavani Taluk,
Erode District, Tamil Nadu. He studied in a
Government High School, Singampettai; and after
completion of graduation, studied
law at Madras Government Law College.
Hailing from an
agricultural family, Shri Justice P. Sathasivam was the first graduate in his
family and also the first law graduate in his village. He
practiced in all types of Writ, Civil and Criminal
matters, Company Petitions, Insolvency Petitions, Habeas Corpus Petitions both
on Original as well as Appellate sides of the Madras High Court. He
also worked as Government Advocate, Additional Government
Pleader and as Special Government Pleader in the Madras High Court.
Shri Justice P.
Sathasivam was appointed as a permanent Judge of the
Madras High Court on 8th January 1996. As
a High Court Judge, he handled all types of cases and disposed of more number
of cases in service, labour and accidental claim matters.
On 20thApril 2007, he
was transferred to the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
He was appointed as
the Judge of the Supreme Court of India on 21st August
2007. On
July19, 2013,
Shri Justice P. Sathasivam will be sworn in as the 40th Chief
Justice of India. He
is due to retire on 26th April, 2014.
He has delivered some
landmark judgments on matters of national importance which include:
Reliance Natural Resources Ltd. vs. Reliance
Industries Limited wherein he emphasized the use of natural
resourcesthrough Public Sector Undertakings. He
observed that "in a national democracy like ours, the national assets
belong to the people" and "the government owns such assets for the.purposes
of developing them in the interests of the people."
Rabindra
Kumar Pal @ Dara Singh vs. Union
of India dealt with the sensational case of
triple murder of Australian Christian Missionary Graham Stuart Staines and his
two minor sons. This judgment concluded upon the hope that Mahatma Gandhi's
vision of religion playing a positive role in bringing India's numerous
religions and communities into an integrated prosperous nation be realized by
way of equal respect for all religion.
Childline India Foundation &
Anr. vs. Alan
John Waters & Ors. recognized the importance of the
protection provided to the Children by the Constitution of India and other laws
and the seriousness with which crimes relating to children and unnatural
offences against children in Shelter Homes should be treated.
Bhim Singh vs. Union of India wherein
the Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme was upheld holding that
the court can strike down a law or scheme only on
the basis of its vires or unconstitutionality but not on the basis of its
viability.
Another significant decision was
in Sajjan Kumar vs. Central Bureau of Investigation which
related to the Sikh riot cases of 1984.
Another historic judgment was in SidharthaVashisht
@ Manu Sharma vs. State (NCT of Delhi) relating to
sensational murder case of Jessica Lall that took place in Delhi wherein the
Court upheld the conviction and life imprisonment awarded to Manu Sharma.
In Amitbhai Anilchandra
Shah vs. Union of India, he enlightened the criminal
jurisprudence and its application.
In another valiant pronouncement in a
matter relating to Pakistani National in Md. Khalil
Chisti vs. State of Rajasthan, he set aside his conviction
under Section 302 and allowed him to go back to his native country.
In Mayawati vs. Union
of India, he scrutinized that the Central Bureau of Investigation
exceeded its jurisdiction in lodging FIR of disproportionate assets against Ms.
Mayawati in Taj Corridor matter and the same was quashed being illegal.
In an appeal Abu Salem, who
was the gangster convicted in 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case, raised a question
that the criminal courts in the country have no jurisdiction to try in respect
of offences which do not form part of the extradition judgment, by virtue of
which he was brought to India and he can be tried only for the offences
mentioned in the extradition decree. In
the remarkable judgment, it was highlighted how the Government of India and
Government of Portugal entered into an agreement
mentioning the relevant offences and Abu Salem was extradited to India to face
the trial. The
petition was dismissed holding that Abu Salem had been charged within the
permissible scope of Section 21(b) of the Extradition Act and the Designated
Court had not committed an illegality in passing the orders.
In
a number of judgments, he cautioned the courts in awarding lesser sentence in
crimes against women and children and showing undue sympathy towards accused by
altering the sentence to the extent of period already undergone. He
believes in giving priority to cases relating to women and children, thereby
making the enforcement of law more stringent in cases of violence against women
and children.
Yakub Abdul Razak Memon vs. State of
Maharashtra, popularly known as Bombay
Bomb Blast Case, wherein 257 persons died, 713 persons were injured and
property worth about Rs. 27 crore was damaged in the city of Mumbai due to
blasts. The
said matter was heard without any break except the court holidays and the
judgment which runs into numerous pages was pronounced within a commendable
period of 9 months. Out
of the eleven death sentences, one was confirmed while other death sentences
were commuted to life imprisonment. In
the very same judgment, Bollywood star Sanjay Dutt was convicted for his
association with the1993 bombings in Mumbai and for acquiring and possessing
illegal weapons in a notified area of Bombay and reduced the sentence to five
years under the Arms Act.
As Executive
Chairman, NALSA, Shri Justice P. Sathasivam visited
several states and created awareness of people's rights and entitlement. He
inaugurated several legal literacy camps in rural areas, schools and colleges.
- Courtesy: Press Information Bureau, Government of India
No comments:
Post a Comment