If Supreme Court judgement on Arunachal was just another matter of judicial overreach or attempt to micro manage executive tasks, we could have ignored. But there is is now a new pattern – of dangerous judicial adventurism.

Earlier in Uttarakhand case a high court judge (and brother of that SC judge who wrote to the Chief Justice resenting court work during some Christian holy days) insulted and passed unsavory taunts on the President of the republic.

In Arunachal, a congress leader with PROVEN MINORITY has been made Chief Minister by court order. Another minority Congress leader in Uttarakhand, Mr Rawat was similarly appointed Chief Minister by courts earlier. The logic then was supremely bizarre – it believed Rawat govt survived the budget vote because everyone voted for the finance bill and yet it disqualified 9 members because they defied the whip. Truly puzzling. If 9 members defied the whip on money bill ( budget) then UK govt was deemed invalid automatically. If the govt stood the test then 9 members didn’t defy the whip and should have been allowed to vote in what was de facto a court called session of assembly.

But the lordship has wisdom beyond reason. It is not an issue of BJP or Congress or left. This points to a more serious malaise of judiciary seeking a role in political play, it may appear to the common man that they are seeking political intervention or even perhaps power through interpretations of technical points, which some may find totally arbitrary. They have just manufactured chaos in a sensitive border state.

In Arunachal ( and in Manipur) defections have been happening for the last thirty years, we all know how Gegong Apang ( the Congress CM) ruled for decades. And their is valid logic behind these moves in diverse state like Aruanchal. Lack of attention to specific areas or communities build resentment among the elected and because they are accountable to the electorate, so they cut the best deal with someone who is more responsive to their demands. That keeps CMs and political power under check and that is indeed a healthy exercise.

On the contrary Indian judiciary is nearly totally unaccountable institution. There are no checks, no regulation by any independent agency. Even some honest Supreme Court judges have expressed dismay and concern over rampant corruption in judiciary . The then SC judges Dr Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra observed that majority of judges in Allahabad high court were corrupt but there was nothing that could be done about it.

Prashant Bhushan and former law minister Shanti Bhushan had similarly claimed most SC judges were corrupt.

The Judges Act(1968) lays down judicial inquiry as precondition to action and the action is only impeachment which on any day is very difficult,cumbersome and essentially a political exercise ( remember Justice Ramaswamy who was indicted in the inquiry but political parties failed to impeach him).

I don’t see why an institution so privileged and so totally unaccountable would not try to manipulate political power unless you assume that those who join judiciary suddenly acquire extra human, divine morality.

Disregarding short term benefits or losses, political parties must unite for the sake of the republic and move fast on placing accountability on a runaway institution.