How can Modi improve the justice system ? Constitutional amendment is required for it.

How many of Justice Krishna Iyer's judgements have you read? If I may quote Fali Nariman, he is a "great stellar pointer in the judicial firmament" (F.S. Nariman, Before Memory Fades, Hay House 2012: Chapter 14-About Some Judges of the Supreme Court). It is in poor taste to criticize a judge who showed great compassion in an era when things were very different and few opposed the Government. His use of "heavy duty words" does not take anything away from his contribution as a judge who, along with Justice Bhagwati, created a new era of jurisprudence and gave a new meaning to "right to live" as we know it today. Also, Justice Bhagwati has nothing to do with his daughter's firm and, again, it is unfair to comment adversely on a good judge without having knowledge of the facts. Judges need to be honest and fearless, above anything else, and both these judges had an ample amount of those qualities. Let us please not disrespect them without basis.

Quoting rajat:

Like Ram Krishna Iyer has also lost it. Sorry Krishna Iyer, may be i am one of the few who believe that your work is merely use of heavy duty words. Please write in understandable english not in jagrons. I thik O. Chinapa Reddy gave much more relief to aam admi and Justice Khanna was true pillar of Indian Judiciary. Justice PN bhagawati did great job with PILs but alas his and his daughter's firm's commercial angle do blur the vision.

Well said. I fail to understand the need to fill judgments or agreements with unnecessary jargon but then again Justice Krishna Iyer was in service a long time ago so he can but be faulted only a little. Most of Justice Bhagwati's contributions are very much suspect in the light of his daughter's commercial firm. It is about the perception of bias here that matters, not the reality.

Hmmm... perception of bias! If you are a lawyer, it is saddening to see your hasty and ill-conceived take on two great judges who even international scholars have accepted as the best judges of India. For example, see www.livelaw.in/conversation-with-professor-george-h-gadbois-jr-a-distinguished-scholar-of-indian-law-and-judicial-behaviour/. It is unfortunate that some lawyers of today criticize judges of yesterday on the basis of a couple of judgements and some 'perceived bias theory', without understanding the socio-political environment, national/constitutional crisis and public opinion of yesterday.

Think for a moment: what link does Justice Bhagwati’s judgements on fundamental rights (for which he is primarily lauded) have with any commercial law firm? Do you have any concrete examples which suggest that any judgement was motivated by potential benefits which may accrue to the law firm? Are you aware of any judgements that the judge delivered where he should have recused himself? Are you suggesting that every judge whose children are lawyers (as is often the case) should resign?

As regards Justice Iyer’s use of jargon, some of his one-liners are so good that they explain a complex concept or view in one line. That was his command over the language, which few can achieve (but most misunderstand and, consequently, criticize!). Yes, in some judgements he rambles about some philosophies, but as most people who criticize long judgements are not aware, judges address litigants, lawyers and future generation of judges through their judgements and their observations in obiter. This is exactly what Justice Iyer did in his (make no mistake) path-breaking judgements, possibly to ensure that future judges get the idea behind his reasoning.

I think we should all be grateful that we live in the post Bhagwati-Iyer-Desai-(Chinappa)Reddy era. We who haven't seen the Emergency, the clash of Judiciary and Executive, the 'post colonial hangover' (a Krishna Iyer term) induced excesses by the police, etc. have no clue what we are talking about unless we have done substantial research on the judgements and the socio-political environment of yesterday.

Quoting @ guest:

Hmmm... perception of bias! If you are a lawyer, it is saddening to see your hasty and ill-conceived take on two great judges who even international scholars have accepted as the best judges of India. For example, see www.livelaw.in/conversation-with-professor-george-h-gadbois-jr-a-distinguished-scholar-of-indian-law-and-judicial-behaviour/. It is unfortunate that some lawyers of today criticize judges of yesterday on the basis of a couple of judgements and some 'perceived bias theory', without understanding the socio-political environment, national/constitutional crisis and public opinion of yesterday.

Think for a moment: what link does Justice Bhagwati’s judgements on fundamental rights (for which he is primarily lauded) have with any commercial law firm? Do you have any concrete examples which suggest that any judgement was motivated by potential benefits which may accrue to the law firm? Are you aware of any judgements that the judge delivered where he should have recused himself? Are you suggesting that every judge whose children are lawyers (as is often the case) should resign?

As regards Justice Iyer’s use of jargon, some of his one-liners are so good that they explain a complex concept or view in one line. That was his command over the language, which few can achieve (but most misunderstand and, consequently, criticize!). Yes, in some judgements he rambles about some philosophies, but as most people who criticize long judgements are not aware, judges address litigants, lawyers and future generation of judges through their judgements and their observations in obiter. This is exactly what Justice Iyer did in his (make no mistake) path-breaking judgements, possibly to ensure that future judges get the idea behind his reasoning.

I think we should all be grateful that we live in the post Bhagwati-Iyer-Desai-(Chinappa)Reddy era. We who haven't seen the Emergency, the clash of Judiciary and Executive, the 'post colonial hangover' (a Krishna Iyer term) induced excesses by the police, etc. have no clue what we are talking about unless we have done substantial research on the judgements and the socio-political environment of yesterday.

Well well well, you seem to have Iyer's penchant for long winded sentences with a plentiful usage of big words at the most.

In a justice system it is important that judges not be perceived as biased. It doesnt matter that they are not in reality but it should seem to be so. If a judge has a kid who's minting millions in some fat-cat firm, either that judge should step down or send junior packing. Its harsh but necessary. Also, very few of a judge's orders are on constitutional law, most are on criminal law or commercial law but those get reported a lot less and which are likely to encourage his children's involvement directly or indirectly.

As I said before I have no issue myself with Iyer's stuffy style of writing but it is difficult for most people to understand and in my book that serves no purpose, since that puts off reading his other judgments. A lot of people take delight in jargon-ous wording which is difficult to understand by others which seems to me rather silly and harbour a slight inferiority complex. Look at the judgments of Denning, which accomplish their objectives and are simple to follow.