Chief Justice of India S.H. Kapadia has recently reviewed judicial functioning in the country. He called for judgements to be delivered with a sense of proportion. Court orders should be implementable. The Courts have of late been interpreting the wide gamut of human rights. But it can be taken to ridiculous lengths. The rights may even include the right to sleep. Justice Kapadia was referring to police inaction in dealing with Baba Ramdev’s meeting at the Ramlila Maidan. The court had declared sleep a fundamental right and linked to the right to life. Earlier the Delhi High Court had made a pronouncement regarding the complaint of people in a posh area of the capital that aircraft noise disturbed their sleep. If the Court makes a ruling which the government cannot enforce, will the government be guilty of contempt of court?
The range of complaints can extend to the right to water, shelter or privacy. In delivering judgements in such cases, the Courts sometimes cross the limit of justiceability. As a result, such pronouncements may become less weighty. Justice Kapadia mentioned the case of safeguarding the environment which can have an adverse effect on employment. It is necessary to study the Indian Constitution between the lines. Judgements should be based on constitutional principles and not on the personal views of judges. What is more to the point is the Chief Justice’s statement that governing is not within the ambit of the judiciary. The doctrine of separation of powers should prevail. Correctives on matters of political import should be recommended with due circumspection. What happened in Pakistan-the Supreme Court dismissing the Prime Minister for contempt of court-is indicative of judicial highhandedness.