- 5 minutes ago
In an exclusive interview, former Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai discusses judicial independence, the collegium system, 'bulldozer justice,' hate speech, and his post-retirement plans, stating that the constitution is supreme over parliament and the judiciary. This special report also covers multiple breaking news stories. It details the ordeal of Prema Thongdok, an Indian citizen from Arunachal Pradesh, who was detained and harassed by Chinese authorities at Shanghai airport. Officials allegedly told her Arunachal is part of China and suggested she get a Chinese passport. The program also notes the formal completion of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, where Prime Minister Narendra Modi hoisted the ceremonial flag. Additionally, the report touches on a potential Ukraine-Russia peace deal brokered by the Trump administration.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Good evening, hello and welcome. You're with the news today, your prime time destination.
00:05News, newsmakers, talking points, our big talking point tonight.
00:10We have an exclusive interview with the former Chief Justice of India, B.R. Gawai,
00:15a day after he demoted office, his first big interview.
00:18He speaks on a variety of subjects. That big interview is coming up in a moment.
00:23Also on the show tonight, Modi at the Ayodhya Dvajroan,
00:28the Prime Minister once again says, end the Macaulay mindset.
00:32What does he mean? And the Indian, harassed by China, speaks out.
00:38I am a proud Arunachalie and an Indian, not a Chinese.
00:43That interview coming up tonight.
00:46But first, as always, it's time for the nine headlines at nine.
00:51Prime Minister Narendra Modi hosts the Dharam Dvaj atop the Ram Mandir,
00:56which marks the end of its construction in Ayodhya,
01:00reiterates it's time to end the Macaulay mindset.
01:08Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee doubles down against the Election Commission over SIR,
01:14takes out a protest march, dares BJP, says,
01:16if you attack me, I'll shake foundation across India.
01:20BJP claims the West Bengal Chief Minister is threatening anarchy.
01:24In an exclusive interview with India Today,
01:29former Chief Justice of India, B.R. Gawai, says,
01:32free speech cannot be absolute,
01:34calls Parliament to bring laws against hate speech,
01:37speaks out also against the shoe attack against him,
01:41says he was not phased.
01:43He is not anti-Hindu.
01:44China denies harassment charges against an Indian woman at Shanghai airport,
01:53claims immigration officials followed law,
01:56says Arunachal illegally set up by India.
01:59India hits PAC, says China must apologize.
02:02More DK Shivkumar loyalists flocked to Delhi to meet the party's top brass.
02:11Chief Minister Siddharth Amaya asked the Congress leadership at the centre to intervene.
02:16Sources say high command is still not willing to take a call.
02:20Assam's chief minister's big remark on late singer Zubin Garg claims he was murdered.
02:30Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi slams him on the viswa sarma,
02:34asks him to reveal the motive of murder as well,
02:37instead of engaging in speculation.
02:39No respite to Delhiites from toxic air.
02:45Volcanic ash impacts several flights in India.
02:49Civil Aviation Ministry says flight operations normal,
02:54only limited precautionary rerouting.
02:59Afghanistan claims nine children killed after Pakistan strikes in the Khos province.
03:05Pakistan rejects the claim,
03:07says didn't carry out any such operations,
03:09inside Afghanistan.
03:15And just weeks after the Asia Cup tangle,
03:18India and Pakistan are slotted once again in the same group
03:21in next year's 2026 T20 World Cup.
03:24Both teams will square off on the 15th of February
03:28in Sri Lanka's Colombo.
03:39But let's turn to the story that's breaking at this moment because the big story coming at the moment is a global one.
03:48U.S. media reports now saying Ukraine has agreed to a deal to end the war with Russia with only minor details outstanding.
03:57A U.S. official has told U.S. media including CNN International that Ukraine's government has agreed to a peace deal brokered by the Trump administration to stop Russia's nearly four-year-long assault.
04:12A common understanding on the proposal has reportedly been reached final details now to be worked out.
04:18The Russian foreign minister Sarajai Logrov says Russia waiting for the interim version of the U.S. peace plan.
04:28And I'm joined by Rohit Sharma, our man in Washington.
04:31Rohit, how are you seeing this?
04:33Is it possible now that we could have a peace deal before Christmas?
04:39You know, Rajdeep, that's the sense that has been going on in D.C. for the past week.
04:44It was reported last week that President Trump wanted to have an agreement to end this war by Thanksgiving,
04:50which is in two days from now.
04:52But now we're hearing about reports coming from UAE that the U.S. has been able to convince the Ukrainians on the peace plan,
05:00though, you know, the president of Ukraine still has to ratify the deal.
05:03He is still waiting on minor details.
05:06While on the other hand, I think Russians have also said that they want to review this again.
05:10But I think the biggest story is that we've been told that the Ukrainians have agreed to it barring minor details.
05:17And the question is, Rajdeep, the bigger question is, you know, we all know the devil is always in the detail.
05:22So we do not know if all those three red lines that were drawn by the Europeans would be taken into consideration or not.
05:28And those three red lines were first that Ukraine should not cede any territory.
05:32It would not be reducing the sizes of its military.
05:35And then it would, Ukraine would have the right to join NATO if they wanted to,
05:40which was something that the Russians did not want to do.
05:42So we'll have to wait and watch on those three red lines.
05:45But the word in Washington, D.C. is that this is heading towards, essentially,
05:50Zelensky coming to D.C. and finally ending the war.
05:56We'll wait and see whether that happens, that could happen.
05:58Within this week, we are told the possibility of the Ukrainian president landing in Washington
06:02to try and seal that deal, at least as an interim measure.
06:06Rohit, joining me there from Washington, D.C., appreciate you joining us.
06:11Okay, I want to turn from there to our big exclusive today.
06:16Justice B.R. Gabbai demoted office officially just a few days ago,
06:23becoming a chief justice who always was never far away from the headlines,
06:29both for his judgments and also, of course,
06:32for a variety of controversies that were swirling around the court.
06:36Today, in an exclusive interview with me and my colleague Anisha Mathur,
06:40Mr. Gabbai said the rule of law must prevail over the rule of bulldozer,
06:45a claim that he has made in the past, but he insisted bulldozer justice has no place.
06:51He also made it clear bail not jail must remain the principle
06:54even in prevention of money laundering cases.
06:58No one from the government ever called him on transfers or appointments
07:01amidst controversies over the manner in which junior judges
07:04have been elevated to the Supreme Court.
07:06The collegium system of appointments he maintains was best suited for the current scenario.
07:12He says parliament can find a mechanism to speed up impeachment
07:16in the context of cases of judicial corruption.
07:20He also maintained that the shoe attack had not affected him.
07:23Remember, a shoe was thrown at him in the court.
07:27He maintained, I am not anti-Hindu.
07:29I hold all religions in the highest esteem.
07:33But he did say that parliament should legislate to curb hate speech.
07:37He said there is also a need for regulation of social media reportage of court proceedings.
07:43And says no post-retirement assignment after he retires.
07:48But he did not categorically rule out a career in politics.
07:53Let's turn to the news today.
07:55Big exclusive.
07:59Hello and welcome to this India Today special
08:05where today my colleague Anisha Mathur who tracks the Supreme Court
08:10and me are joined by a very special guest,
08:13the just retired Chief Justice of India, Justice B.R. Gawai.
08:17Thank you very much, Justice Gawai, for joining us.
08:19Thank you. Thank you, Rajdeep. Thank you, Anisha.
08:2122 years on the bench and you finally retired.
08:26Do you feel a little lost that you no longer will be on the bench?
08:31Are you relaxed with no withdrawal symptoms?
08:34Absolutely relaxed. You know when you are going to retire long by.
08:39And as I said on a Thursday evening at a SCORA function that I was already relaxed
08:47because the last of the judgments which I had to deliver
08:49and two important judgments, one on a presidential reference
08:52and one regard to protection of Aravallis,
08:55I had pronounced them in different combinations on Thursday afternoon.
09:00After that I was fully relaxed.
09:02And as days have gone by, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday,
09:06I am feeling more and more relaxed.
09:07You are not missing it.
09:08No, I am not missing it.
09:08You are not missing being on the bench.
09:10You know, the fact is, Justice Gawai, you had a very short term as Chief Justice,
09:16about just over six months.
09:17And many believe that is too little a time to bring in major institutional reforms.
09:22However, there are those who say that could Justice Gawai have done more
09:26to protect judicial independence and rolled back or pushed back
09:30against what is seen as a very dominating political executive?
09:33How do you respond to those who say that judicial independence
09:36now is being increasingly compromised?
09:38I totally disagree with that narrative.
09:42The Indian judiciary is strong, independent,
09:46and the allegation that we are not that strong or independent
09:50is totally without any basis.
09:52Can I give you two examples before?
09:54I will just give you an example.
09:55Yeah, please go ahead.
09:56On a day, two days prior to my retirement,
10:00I set aside the enactment with regard to the service conditions
10:07of the tribunals, the matter was pending for long.
10:11And I have clearly held in that judgment that independence of judiciary
10:17is one of the important facets of the basic structure of the constitution.
10:24I have also held that the certain provisions in that act
10:27were tinkering with the independence of the tribunal members.
10:33And the tribunals were also an important part of the judiciary
10:36and set aside certain provisions of the enactment.
10:41See, I always believe that the constitution is supreme.
10:44You might have heard about the debates going on before some period of a year back
10:53or one and a half year back.
10:54One of the constitutional functionaries, I don't want to name you,
10:57used to say that the parliament is supreme and not the judiciary.
11:02And I, on a public platform, had more than one occasion said that
11:05neither the judiciary nor the parliament are supreme.
11:09What is supreme is the constitution.
11:10You are referring to former vice president, Jandeep Dhakar.
11:14Okay, so you are saying constitution is supreme, not the parliament.
11:16Yes, and under the constitution, the areas have been earmarked
11:20for all the three wings, the parliament, the legislature,
11:25parliament, that's the legislature, the executive and the judiciary.
11:29And as the judges, we are only empowered to interpret the constitution.
11:34But what happens today if a governor continues to sit on bills,
11:38even today, drawing on your advisory opinion?
11:41Have you read our operative part?
11:42You've said that...
11:43We have clearly held that the governor has to choose between three options.
11:48Yes.
11:49And if he doesn't exercise any of the options and sits endlessly over the bill,
11:56the limited power of judicial review is always available
11:58to the constitutional courts of the country.
12:00So you believe that limited power of the judicial review is still there
12:04even to look at governor's actions and therefore you are saying
12:07it is not as if you've given a license to governor's...
12:09Absolutely no.
12:10There's no license to governors to sit endlessly on bills.
12:13Yeah, but at the same time, we can't take the functions of the parliament
12:16and the legislature upon all still.
12:18Okay, let me give you another example.
12:21Bulldozer justice.
12:22Many believe that was one of the most important judgments you passed,
12:25in fact, before you became Chief Justice last year,
12:28where you said very clearly that rule of law prevails over rule of the bulldozer.
12:33That if someone bulldozes someone's house without following due process,
12:36that's a transgression of the law.
12:38What happened, sir, since?
12:40We've had several states, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh,
12:43where contempt petitions have been filed because there are bulldozers still operating.
12:49You did not even hear them.
12:50Is it because you didn't want to tangle with the executive on even the critical issue of bulldozer justice?
12:56It's totally wrong.
12:58I always say, I always said in my speeches, the farewell speech also,
13:03that bulldozer justice judgment, popularly known as,
13:07regarding demolition of structures, is very close to my heart.
13:12I always believe that rule of law is supreme
13:14and no executive can take over the functions of the judiciary.
13:20So, why didn't you then hear the contract position?
13:23Can you permit me to answer?
13:24Yes, please. Yes, sure, sir.
13:25If you go through my record of last six or six years,
13:30I have hardly taken any holidays.
13:33The only two holidays I take in a year are on my father's birthday,
13:38birth anniversary and death anniversary.
13:39And on other days, I have, even on Mondays, I have been sitting till 4 o'clock.
13:45Normally, the courts rise after the miscellaneous work is over.
13:49But even on Mondays, I have been sitting till 4 o'clock.
13:52On Fridays, if I am required to go out, maybe I get up a little earlier.
13:57And in that period of time, whatever priorities were before me,
14:04I tried to, no doubt that the contempt petitions were filed.
14:08And I already issued notices.
14:10I also, while issuing notices, we had passed an order in strong terms.
14:16Unfortunately, those matters could not come because there were other pressing matters.
14:19I had to decide that if you go through my record of last couple of years,
14:26I have delivered so many judgments with regard to bringing reforms.
14:30So, before Anishan steps in, before Anishan steps in, we are very clear that you…
14:34And on environment also.
14:36On environment, I have a question.
14:37That is where I would like to step in on, as a follow-up to this question.
14:41The perception is that the orders are passed, but then there is no follow-up,
14:46then there is no implementation, and the courts are not doing enough
14:49to ensure that their own orders are passed.
14:51When it comes to the bulldozer justice issue, when it comes to air pollution,
14:54when it comes to even the environment matters,
14:58directions are passed and very, very good directions are passed,
15:01but the executive is simply not implementing.
15:04Could the court not do more?
15:06As you said, you issued notices in some of the bulldozer justice matters,
15:09but then they have just simply not been caught.
15:12So, therefore, I knew that this difficulty would arise.
15:15Therefore, we had, in our judgment itself, said that
15:17if there is any violation of any of the directions of this court,
15:21the high court should be more appropriate to be approached
15:24because in the high court, there would be no area-specific issues.
15:30Unfortunately, the Supreme Court, you know, it's burdened with such a new tendency.
15:35And whenever, we have to prioritize the matters as they are mentioned before the court.
15:42And judges are also human beings.
15:43They can't work beyond their capacity.
15:46But does this show also the limitations of the judiciary?
15:48For example, on crackers.
15:50You all lifted the ban and said green crackers will be allowed,
15:53but with certain limitations and restrictions.
15:55What we saw in the end was many of those guidelines were not being followed on the ground
16:00when it came to actual green crackers or even the timeline that you had said
16:04within which people can burst crackers.
16:06And now we are seeing the increasing levels of pollution even in the national capital.
16:10I'm just wondering, judges pass the judgments.
16:13The implementation, the follow-ups, as Anisha put it, what happens to that?
16:18Does this, in a way, reveal the limitations of the judiciary?
16:22You pass such a strong order on bulldozers.
16:25Eventually, the bulldozing continues in several states.
16:28Again, the limitations of the judiciary.
16:30Do you get a sense that you are almost powerless to stop this?
16:35No, no.
16:36See, there are inherent limitations.
16:39Whatever orders are passed by us, they have to be implemented by the executive.
16:43Whenever it is noticed that they are not being implemented,
16:46we do take a very serious view of the matter.
16:49But the Supreme Court doesn't have a machinery to ensure that its orders are given if it could.
16:55You are talking about this year's firecracker order.
16:58Yes.
16:58In the last year, there was a complete ban.
17:00Yes.
17:01I am living in Luton's room.
17:03Not only on Diwali Day, but days prior to Diwali Day, days after Diwali Days.
17:08We used to listen to crackers' voices.
17:10Now it's cracker.
17:11So, therefore, I just now said that I thought that rather than just sitting idle,
17:21it is better that we must try to find out a solution.
17:24And therefore, I thought that the important aspect was that the pollution control boats were without any manpower.
17:30So, you are not intimidated by the political executive.
17:35You are trying to take or give orders as a judge that you believe will give a more balanced problem-solving approach.
17:42Am I correct?
17:42It's not that you are worried ki what will the executive say if he pass a tough order against them.
17:48Because the general feeling is over the last few years, courts are looking over their shoulder.
17:53Ki what does government want?
17:54Whether it's on Article 370, whether it's on Ayodhya, what does the government want?
17:59It's a totally wrong perception.
18:01As on the very first day that I took course as a judge of the Supreme Court,
18:08and even after the oath I took as a CJI, I had made it clear that I don't want anything from the government.
18:14I am not going to accept any post-retirement assignment.
18:17So, therefore, there is no question of deciding the matters to the liking of the executive also.
18:24One of the very first orders after I started presiding the bench was with regard to a director of ED Enforcement Directed.
18:36Yes.
18:36Who tried to be continued and continued even after the decision of this court to which I was party as a junior judge.
18:45And in the new terms, we thought we have said that this was not permissible for the government,
18:51and we set aside that extension of the tenure while upholding the enactment.
18:57And you see, I don't want to name the matters wherein I have decided which nobody would say that it was to the liking of the government.
19:07One matter wherein we were sitting at 9.30, we were in a function with regard to Narangitra of one of our colleagues.
19:15The then chief justice asked me whether I can sit at 9.30.
19:21So, me and two of my colleagues, I would again, won't name them because they are still in the office.
19:26One of them has retired, that's the Bhopanna.
19:28And we sit at 9.30, we heard the matter till 10.30, I even referred to my, in my ceremonial bench that the Leonard Solicitor General was fully armed to oppose that bail.
19:41And we severely criticised the conduct of the High Court judge who had even refused to give 48 hours protection in spite of there being an interim bail granted by this court.
19:53And there are many other matters with regard to politicians wherein, to the truth, a strong opposition of the government, I granted bail, I don't want to name it.
20:04No, no, no, I will blame, sir. You granted bail to a Mani Sisodia. You state the conviction of Rahul Gandhi that enabled him to restore his MP shape.
20:15You granted bail to a Teesta Settlement. All of that happened before you were chief justice.
20:19The feeling though is, look at even bail, even on PMLA, you gave a very important judgment that effectively ensured that civil liberties of someone accused under PMLA.
20:27I always believed that the right under Article 21 is much superior than the restrictions in the statutes.
20:34But then why is it that so many important bail petitions, for example, that of an Umar Khalid.
20:40There are so many examples that we can give. I don't want to only single out one.
20:43There is a sense that it takes, that a large part of the judiciary today believes in jail, not bail.
20:49The matter keeps getting prolonged, tariq pe tariq, and therefore the individual remains in jail, particularly in politically sensitive cases.
20:58If I may add to that question, when it comes to the benches which are hearing these matters, also questions have been asked.
21:07Whether it's an Umar Khalid, whether it's a Sonam Vangchuk, whether it's even a politically sensitive Vantara matter.
21:13Questions were asked about who is hearing the matter, whether the benches, as the master of the roster, as the chief justice of India.
21:20The concern raised as outside of the court and even within the corridors was that because it's a politically sensitive matter,
21:29the Supreme Court is playing it safe, sending it to a different bench or doing what the government may want it to do.
21:39That perception is totally wrong. The matters go as per the roster system.
21:43As you know, we allot different subjects to the different judges.
21:47And normally, the matters are allotted by computer regeneration to the different pages who are assigned with the subjects.
21:55Respectfully find me before, sir. In the Sonam case or the Vantara case, it was not on the roster.
22:01In Vantara, it was given to a junior judge who was not even connected with environment matters.
22:06And he swiftly passed the judgment in that case.
22:09Even in Omar Khalid, it was given to judges who were seen to have in the past been reluctant to grant pay.
22:17That's a wrong perception. The matters go as per the assignment. You can check it.
22:23And in so far as after I became the Chief Justice of India's Concern, I became soft. I think that's totally incorrect.
22:31I had two matters on one day from one High Court wherein one matter was belonging to the ruling party therein.
22:41I don't want to name the party. And the other was belonging to a member of parliament, belonging to the ruling party in the central government.
22:51And in both the matters, I passed an order staying therein that please don't wear machineries for political purposes.
22:59Let the political battlefield be fought before the electorate. Coincidentally, both those matters were in succession.
23:06So, neither did I pass an order to the liking of the state government, nor did I pass an order to the liking of the central government.
23:13And I was never bothered. Otherwise, I would have not, if that would have been perception, I would have not passed my last judgment with regard to the independence of tribunals.
23:25Sir, if I may, when it comes to independence of judiciary, independence of tribunals, one controversy that came during your tenure was the transfer of Justice Atul Sridharan.
23:36The fact that the collegium itself noted in the recommendation that the transfer is being done on request of the government.
23:45Then we saw the entire controversy over the dissent by Justice Nagaratna regarding the elevation of a particular judge.
23:54In both of these situations, the perception that went out, and I apologize for going by perception again, is that the collegium folded to what the government wanted.
24:06Because in the case of Justice Nagaratna, it was to a judge who was far too junior effectively to become a judge of the Supreme Court in the case of Justice Pancholi.
24:17And eventually he could become chief. So the executive is deciding the order as to who should become chief justice and the collegium is succumbing.
24:26It's totally wrong perception. Insofar as the first matter with regard to a judge of the transfer from other cycle to other I could, I would not like to, because it affects the particular judge.
24:39But of the record I have, when we met over lunch, I had said, given some details. So the collegium has considered all then and after considering that,
24:50it was found that rather than he going to a small court, it is better that his services are utilized to a larger high court.
24:57And insofar as second issue is concerned, have there not been instances prior that judges at serial number 50, 55 have been elevated?
25:05It has been done recently three or four years back when I was not a part of the collegium.
25:11So the collegium takes into consideration various factors. And…
25:16Because you recused yourself when there was a case involving a relative of yours.
25:20Yes.
25:21Who was being made a judge of the Bombay High Court.
25:23A distant relative of mine, yeah.
25:24Distant relative of yours. But every time that happens, people raise questions over the collegium system.
25:29Is the collegium system a little cozy club of the judges who are deciding with one eye on what the government wants,
25:35the other eye not necessarily always on merit?
25:37It's the wrong eye if somebody told me that there was a news item somewhere that it is give and take.
25:42And they tried to link my distant relative with the elevation of one of the judges in the Subraim Court.
25:51I would only just like to request you to go through your own India Today report.
25:57Somebody said to me when there was a criticism that I was instrumental in getting one of my relatives.
26:03Firstly, he is not my close relative, he is a distant relative.
26:06And merely because a particular candidate is related to judge, can it be a disqualification?
26:12If he is otherwise competent, if…
26:16Maybe then when you consider his competence, you might put a little more stringent conditions as compared to the others.
26:23And your India today report from Nakpur, which somebody had sent me, stated that they had given his entire credentials,
26:33and stated that on inquiry everybody in the Nakpur High Court said that he was competent and well-deserving.
26:39And in so far as I am concerned, I recused myself, I was not a part of the interaction with him, not a part of the decision.
26:49But are you satisfied with the Collegium system? Is it too opaque? Does it need to be more transparent?
26:55Is there a better system out there? Should we go back to the NJSE or you don't believe that's the answer?
27:00There can't be any perfect system. There are bound to be loopholes in every system.
27:05But in the present scenario, I think the Collegium system is the best suited system so as to preserve and protect the independence of judiciary.
27:13And it is not as if we neglect the inputs of the other branch, the inputs of the IB, the inputs of the Ministry of Law and Justice,
27:27the views of the chief ministers, the views of the governors of the state.
27:31They are all taken into consideration by the Collegium before they take a final decision.
27:35It is not as if they go three-sit and arbitrarily pick up this candidate and that candidate.
27:40No one from the government or law ministry has ever rung you up and said,
27:43Justice Gawai, could you look at this case in favorably?
27:45No, never. Never. At no stage.
27:47Sir, just to push that bail point a bit further, we are finding increasingly in lower courts, even high courts, unwilling to give bails.
27:55Not just in politically sensitive cases, but thousands and thousands of under-trials who struggle to get bail.
28:01What is the problem and what is the solution to it?
28:04See, I have been saying even on public platforms that bail is a rule and refusal is an exception.
28:12And when I have been traveling after my judgments in those PMLA matters,
28:18I have been told that now the trend is even that earlier the high courts were not granting bail.
28:23But now even the high courts, even the trial courts are granting bail matters in PMLA matters when the incarceration is for a prolonged period without trial.
28:34But the authorities come immediately to court to seek cancellation of bail.
28:38I mean, so, you know, the matter lingers on.
28:41I am of the considered view that whenever the case is not likely to see the end in the near future,
28:52the courts must exercise their discretion to grant a bail.
28:57If there is any serious apprehension, certain conditions in order to protect the interest of prosecution,
29:04to protect the interest of the witnesses could always be granted.
29:07Sir, let me come to an issue which is close to my heart and I know close to your heart.
29:11Free speech and hate speech. We look at them both separately.
29:14First, free speech. We have a peculiar situation in a sense wherein you all initiate contempt proceedings against senior advocate Prashant Bhushan
29:24for two tweets that he passed criticizing the judiciary.
29:28And then, when a shoe is thrown in your court, in the Chief Justice's court, unprecedented, you say,
29:34no, no, we don't want any action to be taken against the individual.
29:37Even though clearly the individual was behaving in a manner that was clearly contempt of the court.
29:42I want to understand from you, what explains this dichotomy?
29:47That in the case of Prashant Bhushan, instantly the court says, no, no, we will file contempt proceeding.
29:52But someone is shoe-throwing at the Chief Justice and no action is taken.
29:57Your statement that it was done instantly is firstly out of record.
30:02Okay. Or not born from record.
30:04The proceedings were pending much prior to.
30:07And when I entered into spray, I was one of the junior judges, the bench was presided by someone else.
30:13And we heard the matter at length. It is not as if the matter was decided without hearing it.
30:22In fact, we had also heard one of the very respected members of the bar, Mr. Shanti Bhushan, who had also argued that matter.
30:31And after hearing the matter, we found that there was no remorse in making certain very serious unsubstanted allegations against the judges.
30:45And therefore, we held guilty. But while holding guilty, we did not even impose a sentence of one day.
30:52But at the same time, when it came to the shoe-throwing incident, you said, I don't want it to go, the matter is over, I don't want it to go further.
30:59Many believed that this was a sign that you were a little, you didn't want to get into a confrontation there, I say, with the social media army.
31:08This social media army, right wing social media army was very critical of you because of certain observations you made in a case involving a Vishnu idol.
31:17And suddenly, they started attacking you.
31:19To be fair, sir, in that, that social media army was also misled because of misreporting.
31:24And everyone does understand that the Vishnu remarks were not actually made in the way they were reported.
31:30Yeah, but the way, but you know, as a result, you had the social media army driving criticism.
31:35In a condemned jurisdiction, I have always believed, if you see my track record, even as a judge of the Bombay High Court,
31:42I have always believed that the majesty of law lies not in punishing someone, but forgiving someone.
31:49And even two, three weeks back, if you recollect, there was a split between two judges of the court with regard to sentencing some lawyers on account of contempt.
32:04The bench of which I was a party, the three judges bench, we decided that we should show magnanimity and…
32:11But does it worry you, sir, that people on social media will take an observation of yours on a Lord Vishnu title,
32:19make it out to be that Justice Gawa is anti-Hindu, and there are political implications because you are a Buddhist, Ambedkarite,
32:26you avowed secularists and suddenly it pushes you on the defensive.
32:29Are judges worried about what is social media doing, saying about their judgment, about character assassination of judges?
32:35Does it worry you? Should there be restrictions?
32:37That did not absolutely affect me anyway.
32:40It didn't affect you at all?
32:42Because I, my conscience was clear. I have always said that I hold all the religions in the highest esteem.
32:48My father was a very secular person, secular leader. I have tried to embalm his qualities and that.
32:55And that whatever decision I took was at the spot. I was not even knowing that throwing up the shoe has anything related to the incident with regard to Lord Vishnu.
33:07You didn't feel targeted because you have spoken about a Vishnu idol in a very, dare I say, politically, Hindutva, majoritarian environment.
33:17That I have to be very careful next time about any observations I make on matters of religion or faith.
33:22No. Thereafter, of course, whenever I had to make any comments, I restrained myself because if some genuine and just lighthearted comments are taken out of the way,
33:34I will agree that thereafter I was somewhat cautious in making statements on the court.
33:40But I did not even know that show-throughing has any relation with…
33:44Should there be restrictions on social media, sir, in your view, in the manner in which they instantly give pass observation on judgments?
33:51Yes, of course. I have heard people telling me that they have heard on social media, I have done this, I have done that, when I have never said that.
34:01It's totally wrong reporting, erroneous reporting. I have even seen morphing.
34:06You at no stage were looking to insult Hinduism. There was no question of that at all.
34:10There was no question of it. No question of it. I have been to temples, I have been to dargahs, I have been to mosques, I have been to gurudwaras.
34:20I have been to churches. When I was in Rome, I was in Vatican for two hours.
34:26But did it disturb you that someone came into the court and threw a shoe at the Chief Justice? Did it not disturb you at any stage or were you completely calm?
34:33Whatever I took there, it was just at the spur of the moment. Maybe it was because of upbringing of the values of forgiveness.
34:43Because I thought that I should not give unnecessary importance. So I started continuing with the proceedings and then when the lunch recess, I was asked what to be done.
34:54So I told the registry, let him go up. You return his shoe also so that he doesn't have to walk away.
35:01Sir, the bar clearly didn't agree with the decision that you've taken. The bar then moved a petition.
35:07There is now your successor, Chief Justice, in fact, has said that there will be now certain guidelines as Rajdeep has also been saying.
35:16When it comes to social media or reportage, there are now questions being asked by the government, by the court about restricting this kind of criticism of the court, restricting the kind of reportage that is done.
35:32Isn't that also a slippery slope, sir?
35:35You have just now said that my successor is seized as a matter. It's better not to make any comment.
35:41No, but you think that there should be, there need to be reasonable restrictions.
35:44Yes, there has to be.
35:45Free speech is not absolute.
35:47Our guarantees also are subject to reasonable restrictions.
35:52You might be aware that one of the first constitutional amendments in 1951 was necessitated because the Supreme Court had interpreted the right to free speech to such an extent that unless you say something of waging a war against the country.
36:11And therefore, various reasonable restrictions were imposed by the first amendment to the constitution in 1951.
36:16Yeah, which is of course a very contentious issue at the time. Jawala Nehru also went through a lot of criticism, but it brings us to hate speech.
36:22That brings us actually to our next question, which is hate speech. And since you mentioned the waging war question, the sedition question. We are seeing a lot of cases filed against persons who criticize the government and they get hauled up under the sections which are with regard to waging war against the country or criticizing the government becomes a much more serious issue.
36:49On the other hand, we have situations where there is religion based or caste based comments being made by politically connected persons.
36:56There are in fact orders and orders again coming back to the same issue, orders and orders of the court for a proactive stance against hate speech, for a proactive stance action by executive.
37:09But then we see, and if I may use that term, wahi dhak ke teen paath, hota kuch nahi hai.
37:16I personally feel that a balanced approach is the need of the day.
37:20Seditious speech?
37:21Explain, explain to us what is a balanced approach for us when someone is resorting to brazen hate speech.
37:26No, no, balanced at the time while permitting a person to enjoy his right or freedom of speech, the reasonable restrictions which the constitution itself has imposed have to be given effect to.
37:39Maybe by the legislature should come with an enactment prohibiting the hate speech.
37:46That you will not take up a post-retirement job.
37:48Is there a possibility that you could get into politics?
37:51Like you come from a political family.
37:53Is there any possibility that we will see Justice Gawai possibly as a politician in the future?
37:58At the moment.
37:59No, at the moment.
38:00Have you thought about it?
38:02I have not yet thought about it, just as I told them the other day. I am just cooling off. I have not even decided whether I will take up arbitration or I will do only opinions.
38:13So for the time being I have decided not to do anything and I always consider that you should leave by the day.
38:20Because you know some of your predecessors have become Rajya Sabha MPs, nominated. Some have gone on to become governor. Some are becoming heads of various tribunals. Do you believe that's a healthy practice?
38:31It's for each individual.
38:33It's an individual perception.
38:35But your own perception?
38:36In so part as I am concerned, I am not going to accept any, as a head of any tribunal, I am not going to accept any gubernation post. I am not going to accept a nominated Rajya Sabha also. I am very clear on that.
38:50And a politician? Could you become a public…
38:52That I don't know what is in store after…
38:55Very interesting. You are not ruling that out. You come from a political family.
38:58I have not yet thought about it.
39:00And Maharashtra is looking for political leaders of stature.
39:03I have not yet given a thought to it, to be very clear.
39:06But it's very interesting, Anisha, that…
39:09There is no clear no when it comes to politics.
39:13And more than that, very interestingly sir, the moment you completed your term, you came back from the swearing-in of your predecessor, not in an official car.
39:24I think you came back…
39:25Not in the official Chief Justice's car.
39:26Not in the official Chief Justice's car.
39:27Not in the official Chief Justice's car.
39:28Not in the Chief Justice's car.
39:29It almost seems as if you want to give up all the benefits that you will get sooner rather than later.
39:35Is that a conscious choice? Do you believe judges? Because this has been an argument.
39:38Should judges restrain themselves from taking post-retirement benefits?
39:42No, I won't say, you know, generally, it is everybody's perception because the judges have also gathered such a huge experience with their dedication to so many years of judiciary and the various tribunals who require their services, their experience.
40:01So, it's for a particular individual as to what is… what he has to do in future.
40:06Insofar as the car is concerned, I always believed that once you are not a Chief Justice of India, you are not entitled to use the Chief Justice of India specially.
40:14And the Chief Justice of India should go to the Supreme Court in the Srijai's car.
40:19So, what next for you? Have you thought about it at all? What next in life?
40:23For the moment, just relax.
40:26For the moment. How does Justice Gawai relax? What is your way of relaxing?
40:30No, I have now increased my time for exercises and then spending time with family, friends.
40:38Okay, good. Justice Gawai, you've answered a lot of our questions and you've…
40:44Avoided some of our questions.
40:46And you've avoided some which you have every right to do. But I'm glad that you've spoken out so candidly. It's easier to do it once you've retired.
40:54But you have gone through a very important period in our judiciary and therefore given us a glimpse of the challenges that lie ahead being a judge in this country.
41:03Not easy being a judge today in this social media age. But thank you very much, therefore…
41:09…for joining us. Thanks, Anisha. And that was Justice B. R. Gawai, the former Chief Justice of India now, who has not ruled out what happens next,
41:22including potentially, who knows, a career in public life in some form. With Anisha Mathur, Rajdeep Sardisai for India Today. Thanks for watching us.
41:33Thank you so much, sir.
41:38And there's an extended interview of that available on our website only on India Today. You can get lots of details on many of his court judgments in that.
41:50Let's move on to our other big story because China is back to doing what it does often, which is provoke India and harass Indian citizens.
41:58That's exactly what happened because days after an Arunachal-born woman alleged harassment for several hours at China's Shanghai airport due to her identity as Arunachali,
42:10Arunachali, Beijing and New Delhi are in a war of words. While Beijing has dismissed the allegations and instead launched a propaganda drive, India has made it clear that China overstepped its mark,
42:22that Arunachali is a part of India, that Arunachali is a part of India and you cannot treat the citizens of Arunachali like this.
42:28I spoke to the woman at the center of this gathering storm.
42:34Listen in to what she had to say.
42:38And joining me now is the woman who was at the heart of this terrible ordeal that the Chinese authorities subjected to her.
42:46Prema Tongdok, appreciate you joining me here on the news today. I want to understand what exactly happened to you at the Shanghai airport.
42:58What did the immigration authorities tell you when you were there on a stopover on your way to Tokyo?
43:06Thank you, sir. Firstly, I would like to thank India Today for being the first media channels to reach out and broadcast the story
43:15on a very important issue. So basically, I have, in fact, traveled and transited from Shanghai in the past.
43:25And this was my second time transiting. And it seems like more of a pick and choose and harassment issue here,
43:32because the first time that I was transiting via China, I did call up the Chinese embassy in London.
43:38And they confirmed that as long as your transit is less than, say, 12 to 24 hours, you are able to transit.
43:45There was no issue whatsoever on holding an Indian passport.
43:50So I basically was traveling on holiday between London Gatwick to Japan with a transit in Shanghai.
43:59The first instance that when I did travel was on 16th of October 2024. And I did transit very easily with no questions asked whatsoever.
44:11However, this time, basically, the immigration officer came to single me out of the queue while I was queuing up for the security check in and basically took my passport from me,
44:25from my possession and said, when I did continue to ask, what is the issue? I have a connecting flight.
44:31Why are you singling me out and taking me out of the queue? She went on to say Arunachal is not part of India,
44:38that it's part of China and that my Indian passport was an invalid document for travel.
44:44He said very clearly that Arunachal is not part of India, it's part of China.
44:55Exactly.
44:56Because the Chinese authorities have interestingly claimed that they carried out checks, procedures in accordance with laws and regulations.
45:06You are telling me you've transited through the same journey, but you were never subject to this kind of harassment as you went.
45:13How did you respond when they told you this and were they not even allowing you to move out?
45:18Definitely not able to move around, except between where I was seated to the to the toilets, really.
45:28And they wouldn't even let me have access to food or go to the terminals.
45:33I had to sit there just in front of the China Eastern airline transfer desk and right next to them was a smaller immigration desk, both of which officials would just kind of,
45:46when I go to the airline, they say speak to the immigration, when I speak to the immigration, they say go to the airline.
45:52They kept basically, you know, transferring me from one desk to the other and not giving a definitive answer.
45:59Of course, there is no law or written document that they produce to show and to tell me why they are holding me back, how they can claim an Indian passport to be invalid.
46:11But they simply said Arunachal pointing at my at my passport saying you're born in Arunachal.
46:17This is not part of India, it's part of China.
46:20One of the officials, while taking me from the initial immigration desk to the place next to the transfer desk during the shuttle where basically she was escorting me from one part of the airport to the other,
46:36even went on to say, why don't you apply for a Chinese passport?
46:40If you really want to leave the country, you should apply for a Chinese passport because you are Chinese.
46:45Arunachal is part of China, which obviously was a very confusing and a very, I would say, outrageous.
46:54How did you respond to them?
46:57How did you respond to this kind of outrageous statements that were being made by the Chinese?
47:02Exactly.
47:03I mean, I don't speak sea of Chinese.
47:05I don't have land, voting, property rights in China.
47:10I've never had public access to public funds in China.
47:14I've always been a proud Indian citizen and will continue to be so.
47:19I've never heard of the concept of Arunachal Pradesh ever being part of China.
47:24And funnily enough, when I saw the interview from the Chinese government this evening, where they stated that Arunachal is in fact an illegal,
47:37they called Arunachal an illegal set up by India, which further confirms that the detention and the treatment with malice is validated by the statement that they agreed that Arunachal is part of China and not India.
47:53You know, it's interesting because the Chinese have made it a practice to issue staple visas to Indian nationals from Arunachal, which has also, of course, caused considerable disquiet.
48:06India has, of course, objected to this.
48:09But you're saying you are only in transit.
48:12You are not planning to travel through China.
48:15And as you've said earlier, you've done this on numerous occasions.
48:19It almost seems as if for some reason you were being singled out.
48:23You're someone who's done a PhD or you've been, you've graduated, sorry, with a BA in economics and a MSc degree in international business from the United Kingdom.
48:35So clearly you have a very impressive CV.
48:38Did they not recognize any of that, that you've, that you've been traveling, you've done this journey in the past and you've never had to experience this.
48:45This was the first time you've been subject to this kind of harassment.
48:49Exactly. I mean, I have, you know, studied economics honors from Sriram College of Commerce in Delhi University, went on for my further studies and masters in the UK, then actually pursued as part of my continuous, you know, career development, a second masters in accounting as well while working for the financial services in London.
49:14And in fact, my job itself is regulations. So I work advising my billion dollar clients in the financial services about regulations and the potential regulations which keep them in the law.
49:29So obviously things like this is very disturbing that they just come up with claims over my birthplace and call it.
49:43Yeah, part of China. And I'm told that you eventually managed to get in touch with the Indian consulate in Shanghai through your friends.
49:51Six officials from there arrived at the airport within an hour, brought you food. So it required intervention.
49:58I'm presuming therefore by those consulate officers before you were finally allowed to, you are allowed to, to get away. Am I correct? To, to be freed.
50:06Correct. I mean, they did in, they did say to me, either go back to your country or go back to UK.
50:12Now, after a 12 hour flight being held up with no written law or ground on claims, basically, and not actually laws of the land for 18 hours or so, it was impossible for me to have the physical capacity to be able.
50:30I was actually quite nauseous by the time the Indian government, the officials came because they, I did not have access to food.
50:37Right.
50:38They wouldn't let me go to the terminal.
50:40No food?
50:41No.
50:42No food?
50:43Absolutely nothing from the airline, nothing.
50:45They actually provided a little dry biscuit, which I, which I gave to another elderly who was also in a similar, some situation, but he was held up for many hours.
50:56So I offered the food to another fellow passenger.
51:00I mean, it wasn't food, it was dry biscuit.
51:03Can I ask you therefore, can I therefore ask you ma'am in conclusion, what is your message to the Chinese authorities today?
51:11As this has become a diplomatic battle, what would you like to tell those who harassed you in this manner in, in Shanghai?
51:19What is your message to the Chinese authorities?
51:22See, sir, all I want is peace and to have good relations, that India should have good relations with its neighboring countries.
51:29And I see that India has been taking several steps towards a very friendly approach with China.
51:35In fact, opening up direct flights to China in the recent couple of months.
51:40And it seems quite two-faced that on the front, you are shaking hands with us.
51:46And in the backlog, you are holding up and harassing Indian citizens, especially citizens who don't actually work for the government,
51:57don't have any influence or a platform to be able to influence or change the geopolitical boundaries.
52:04And simply put, this is such a big and diplomatic issue, which they should handle with the authorities of India and not harass a commoner,
52:17a citizen who absolutely does not have any hand in moving borders.
52:22And India has always been the country in which Arnachal Pradesh resides.
52:30And we have always been proud Indians.
52:32We don't have any land voting rights, nothing in China.
52:36We have always been part of India.
52:38And it's outrageous that even after such a big ordeal, the recent news, they have stated that India has set up Arnachal Pradesh illegally.
52:51I mean, that's news to us.
52:53We are residents there.
52:54We know that we have always been part of India.
52:57Okay, those are strong words.
53:02I hope that someone out there is listening.
53:04You are, Prema Thongdok, a proud Arunachali, a proud Indian.
53:09And we empathize with what you had to go through.
53:11And I hope that this is a wake up call to the authorities in Beijing.
53:16And this is completely unacceptable what happened to you.
53:19Thank you so much for joining me and sharing your ordeal with our audiences.
53:24I appreciate it.
53:26Thank you, sir.
53:29Okay, we have a prize announcement today on news today.
53:32If you recall on Bihar Counting Day, November 14th, we had a series of prizes based on questions that we put out.
53:39LED higher TVs were being given every hour.
53:42Here are the winners of the LED JITO contest on India today.
53:46At 8am, the question was which alliance is projected to win the Bihar elections and how many seats will they secure?
53:52Remarkably, Radhakrishnal Alam Patat from Palakat came very close to it.
53:59He wins the first LED.
54:01The question for 9am, name the person who would be sworn in as the new chief minister of Bihar.
54:07Who would swear in the new chief minister of Bihar?
54:09It was the governor, Arif Mohammed Khan and the winner was Subramanaya from Bengaluru.
54:14Question for 10am, how many seats are needed for a clear majority in the Bihar assembly?
54:20It was a rather easy question.
54:21The winner is Dinesh Kumar Sina from Delhi, 122 seats.
54:25Question for 11am, who was Bihar's first woman chief minister?
54:29It was the one and only Rabri Devi.
54:31The winner is Akshat Goyal from Gurugram.
54:34The question at 12pm was how many times has Nitish Kumar taken oath as chief minister of Bihar?
54:40He had taken oath 9 times, he is now 10th.
54:42Winner, Indranil Saunik from Patna.
54:44Question for 1pm, who served as the first chief minister of Bihar?
54:48The winner is Vinay Khulkar from Bengaluru.
54:51Question for 6pm, which chief minister from Bihar has been honoured with the Bharat Ratna?
54:56Karpuri Thakur, the winner was S Rajshekar from Hyderabad.
55:00Question for 8pm, which Bihar politician has also been part of an IPL franchise squad?
55:06Well, the answer was Teja Sri Yadav and the winner was Yada Rajshekar also from Hyderabad.
55:12Doing very well Hyderabad.
55:13Question for 9pm, when did Nitish Kumar last contest the Vidansabha election?
55:17The winner is Raghavendra HN from Bengaluru.
55:20Lots of winners, all of whom have won brand new LEDs.
55:24Good luck to you, good luck to Hyder for giving you those LEDs.
55:28We keep doing some new things here on India today.
55:31I want to leave you though with our image of the day.
55:34The Prime Minister hoisting the triangular saffron Dharam Dhwach at the Ram Mandir
55:40that marks the completion of the temple in Ayodhya.
55:44Thanks for watching.
55:45Stay well, stay safe.
55:46Good night.
55:47Shubratri.
55:48Jai Hind.
55:49Jai Hind.
55:53Jai Hind.
55:54Tashkharikum-Tashkharounamvya Diahatiya Alayya Alay
56:02ее UP.
56:04Happy day toumin Buraya Sare.
56:06How out?
Be the first to comment