8/9/2019 Bank Nationalisation

1/4

LegalCrystal - Indian Law Search Engine - www.legalcrystal.com

Rustom Cowasjee Cooper Vs. Union of India Uoi!

LegalCrystal Citation : legalcrystal.com/642301

Court : Supreme Court of India

"ecided #n $ May0!1"#0

Reported in  : $I%1"#0SC131&' 1"#0(0)*+,3!4(SC)' (1"#0)2SCC2"&'-1"#11SC%!12

 %udge : M. idayatulla C..' $.. ro5er' $.. %ay' I.. ua' .C. Sa and'

 &cts : 7an8ing Companies ($c9uisition of ,ransfer of nderta8ings) $ct 1"6"'

 &ppeal 'o. : ;rit ee Cooper

Respondent : nion of India (oi)

 &d(ocate for "ef. : .%. o8ale and 'S.7. ;ad. $d5s.

 &d(ocate for )et*&p. : M.C. Cala' .$. ority of ten udges against one tis Court declaredte $ct to @e unConstitutional. ,e decision of te Court =as gi5en on Ae@ruary10 1"#0.

2. Bn Ae@ruary 13 1"#0 a meeting =as organised @y te 7lit ational Aorum at Dital@ai Aatel ouse at eli. It =as presided o5er @y Mr. Moan*umarmanglam an ad5ocate of tis Court. $ccording to te ne=s items pu@lisedte neEt day in te industan ,imes te ,imes of India and te

8/9/2019 Bank Nationalisation

2/4

ationalisation caseF tat if necessary te issue =eter

8/9/2019 Bank Nationalisation

3/4

6. e asserted tat e ad said :. no aspersions sould @e cast on te >udiciary ande5en toug te decision ad farreacing conse9uences. I pointed out tat te >udgment =as cautiously =orded and te learned udges ad not callenged teautority of udiciary and =ould 5ery muc li8e to see its

prestige remained ig and its image untarnised. ;e cannot o=e5er a5oidpointing out =erein according to us te decision is erroneous primarily @y reasonof its conse9uences for attempts at social reform.

&. e eEplained =at e ad said @y recalling is speec. It is not necessary to9uote is 5ersion. e complained tat te ne=spapers ad pic8ed out ideas @ut puttem in teir o=n =ords and tat it =as not al=ays possi@le to contradict tene=spapers. e eEpressed is 5ie=s on te institution of property as afundamental rigt to =ic it is not necessary to refer ere. e concluded @ysaying

I may also state tat in ray comments on te 7an8 udgment no improper moti5es=ere attaced to te onF@le udges. ,ere =as no malice eiter against teonF@le udges or te institution of Supreme Court te independence of =ic Ionestly ceris.

". In support of is o=n a?ida5it Mr. *adil8ar eEi@ited a?ida5its from Messrs.Moan *umarmangalam $. S. %. Cad and S. M. osi. In tese a?ida5its (=icare ipsissima 5er@a 5er@a) support =as gi5en to te denials of Mr. *adil8ar.

10. $t an earlier earing te petitioners promised to Gle a?ida5it of reporters etc.

present at te meeting. $t te resumed earing no a?ida5its =ere Gled on teground tat te >ournalists follo=ing teir code of conduct did not =is to Gle anymaterial unas8ed and re9uest =as terefore made to summon tem in teinterest of >ustice. ;e did not tin8 it necessary to prolong te earing of te caseas on te material @efore us tere =as noting to contradict te a?ida5its =icdeny te accuracy of te ne=spaper reports. ;e accordingly closed te case fororders.

11. ,ere is no dou@t tat te Court li8e any oter institution does not en>oyimmunity from fair criticism. ,is Court does not claim to @e al=ays rigt altougit does not spare any e?ort to @e rigt according to te @est of te a@ility

8no=ledge and >udgment of te udges. ,ey do not tin8 temsel5es in possessionof ail trut or old tat =ere5er oters di?er from tem it is so far error. o oneis more conscious of is limitations and falli@ility tan a udge @ut @ecause of istraining and te assistance e gets from learned Counsel e is apt to a5oidmista8es more tan oters.

12. Aurter te supremacy of a legislature under a =ritten Constitution is only=itin =at is in its po=er @ut =at is =itin its po=er and =at is not =en anyspeciGc act is callenged it is for te courts to say. If tat =ere realised muc of te misunderstanding =ould @e a5oided and te organs of o5ernment =ould

function truly in teir o=n speres. ;e are constrained to say also tat =ile fairand temperate criticism of tis Court or any oter Court e5en if strong may @eactiona@le attri@uting improper moti5es or tending to @ring udges or courts intoatred and contempt or o@structing directly or indirectly =it te functioning of Courts is serious contempt of =ic notice must and =ill @e ta8en. %espect iseEpected not only from tose to =om te >udgment of te Court is accepta@le @ut

8/9/2019 Bank Nationalisation

4/4

also from tose to =om it is repugnant. ,ose =o err in teir criticism @yindulging in 5iliGcation of te institution of Courts administration of >ustice andte instruments troug =ic te administration acts sould ta8e eed for tey=ill act at teir o=n peril. ;e tin8 tis =ill @e enoug caution to personsem@ar8ing on te pat of criticism. ;it tese =ords =e order te papers to @eGled.

LegalCrystal - Indian Law Search Engine - www.legalcrystal.com