NEW DELHI: After penning successive dissents in two judgments of nine-judge SC benches, Justice B V Nagarathna on Tuesday took issue with CJI D Y Chandrachud's comments on the Justice Krishna Iyer Doctrine and said the remarks were "neither justified nor warranted". Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, who penned a dissent judgment, too disapproved of the majority opinion criticising Justice Iyer's Marxian interpretation of Article 39(b). "I must record here my strong disapproval of the remarks made on the Krishna Iyer Doctrine as it is called.
This criticism is harsh and could have been avoided," he said. The majority opinion of seven judges, authored by CJI Chandrachud, criticised Justice Iyer's minority interpretation of Article 39(b) in 1978 in Ranganatha Reddy case and also faulted the adoption of the minority view in Sanjeev Coke (1982) case judgment by a five-judge bench, which included Justice Nagarathna's father Justice E S Venkataramiah who went on to become CJI in 1989. CJI Chandrachud said, "The majority judgment in Ranganatha Reddy expressly distanced itself from the observations made by Justice Krishna Iyer (speaking on behalf of the minority of judges) on the interpretation of Article 39(b).
Thus, a coequal bench of this court in Sanjeev Coke violated judicial discipline and erred by relying on the minority opinion." This was not taken kindly by Justice Nagarathna, who said, "Judgments in Ranganatha Reddy, Sanjeev Coke, Abu Kavur Bai and Basantibai correctly decided the i.
