DIPAK MISRA, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, UDAY UMESH LALIT
Census Commissioner – Appellant
Versus
R. Krishnamurthy – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dipak Misra, J.
The present appeal depicts and, in a way, sculpts the non-acceptance of conceptual limitation in every human sphere including that of adjudication. No adjudicator or a Judge can conceive the idea that the sky is the limit or for that matter there is no barrier or fetters in one’s individual perception, for judicial vision should not be allowed to be imprisoned and have the potentiality to cover celestial zones. Be it ingeminated, refrain and restrain are the essential virtues in the arena of adjudication because they guard as sentinel so that virtuousness is constantly sustained. Not for nothing, centuries back Francis Bacon[BACON, Essays: Of Judicature in I The Works of Francis Bacon (Montague, Basil, Esq. ed., Philadelphia: A Hart, late Carey & Hart, 1852), pp. 58-59.] had to say thus:-
“Judges ought to be more learned than witty, more reverend than plausible, and more advised than confident. Above all things, integrity is their portion and proper virtue......Let the judges also remember that Solomon’s throne was supported by lions on both sides: let them be lions, but yet lions under the throne.”
2. Almost half a century back Frankfurter, J.[ FRANKFURTEER
Tata Cellular v. Union of India
Khetrabasi Biswal v. Ajaya Kumar Baral
Udit Narain Singh Malpaharia v. Board of Revenue
Prabodh Verma v. State of U.P.
Tridip Kumar Dingal v. State of W.B.
Suresh Seth v. Commr., Indore Municipal Corporation
Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
Rusom Cavasiee Cooper v. Union of India
M.P. Oil Extraction v. State of M.P.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.