Ayodhya one of most important cases in world: Justice Bobde

New Delhi: Supreme Court judge Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, who will take over as the next Chief Justice of India in November, said Wednesday the Ayodhya title dispute case was one of the most important cases in the world today.

In an interview to a news channel, Justice Bobde, who is set to succeed CJI Ranjan Gogoi on November 18, said the Ayodhya dispute was a very important case in judicial history. Justice Bobde is part of the five-judge Constitution bench that heard for 40 days appeals against the 2010 verdict of the Allahabad high court in the case.

Speaking to PTI, Justice Bobde said he is not in favour of disclosing the deliberations of the Supreme Court’s collegium on rejection of names for higher judiciary, saying it is not a question of secrecy but the right to privacy.

Justice Bobde, who will become the 47th CJI on November 18, said a conservative approach on the issue of disclosing the entire deliberations of the collegium was necessary as “people’s reputation are at stake” and it cannot be sacrificed just to satisfy the desire of citizens to know.

The statement by justice Bobde, who was part of a nine-judge Constitution bench which declared right to privacy as a fundamental right, assumes significance in the wake of a growing clamour for more transparency in the functioning of the apex court’s collegium.

Justice Bobde, 63, also rued the criticism of judges on social media for their judicial actions and said most of the judges, who are not “thick skinned”, get perturbed.

“I still think that we need to be conservative. The reason is that people’s reputation is at stake. We need to be conservative. Half of the complaints which come are not true. I am saying half as a phrase. And I think  that the collegium and the court should be conservative in these matters,” he told PTI, a day after he was appointed as the next CJI.

Justice Bobde was responding to a question whether any steps are required to make the collegium’s functioning more transparent.

Batting for the right to privacy of those, who have not been selected by the collegium for appointment or elevation as judges in the higher judiciary, he said they also have a “life to live” and why should their negative details be put in public domain.