Like mirror, TV camera is also cruel. ABN Andhra Jyoti channel has finishedcareer of seven judicial officers in Andhra Pradesh, when its Warangal District cameramen barged into the examination hall ‘specially arranged’ for judges to write LL.M. correspondence Course examination freely, without any fear of invigilation, and caught them copying from text books and hand-written sheets. Chief Justice Nissar Ahmad Kukru did not loose much time in suspending the copycat judges after watching the CD sent by the TV Channel which vividly picturised the unethical misconduct of copying in Kakatiya University Examination. The incentive of three increments for judges for having or acquiring higher qualification in legal education turned out to be lethal for those who are caught red-handed by camera. When invigilators were frightened, students frustrated and judges were issuing threats, the media exposed nexus between inactive university authorities and over active judicial officers.

While one was found copying from a law book hidden under his answersheet, the written slips and pages torn from textbooks were seized from other judges. K Ajitsimha Rao, senior civil judge, Ranga Reddy district, M. Kistappa, principal senior civil judge, Anantapur, P Vijayendar Reddy, second additional district judge, Ranga Reddy district, M. Srinivasachary, senior civil judge in Bapatla of Guntur district and Hanumantha Rao, additional junior civil judge in Warangal were suspended.  (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/HC-suspends-five-judges-caught-copying-during-LLM-exam/articleshow/6443036.cms 26th August 2010)Times of India reported on August 27 that judges were found copying in a surprise ride by the invigilating squad, totally ignoring the role of media operation by the tv channel. Though the fact that judges copied made sensational news, another fact that university facilitated them to copy was equally bad.  The PTI and INN reported the same without any mention about media adventure and university’s indulgence. It said: The court directed the University officials to initiate action against all judges who indulged in mass copying, and to submit a comprehensive report on the entire incident. The court also directed the state government to initiate disciplinary action against them, as, it claimed, they brought disrepute to the law profession.  (INN news as appeared in http://fullhyderabad.com/hyderabad-news/five-judges-suspended-for-mass-copying-1434, 26th August 2010) (PTI news appeared in several newspapers and magazines including http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?691607 26th August 2010) Of all the other newspapers, Andhra Jyoti Telugu Daily alone explained how its TV channel team exposed the cheating by some judges and frightened inaction of University.

The reporter Mr. Vijayakumar, of Andhra Jyothi TV channel, Warangal, who ventured into ‘highly’ secured hall which was specially and separately arranged after some judicial officers spoke to top authorities of University, told this author that most of the officers chose Warangal center for their LL.M. for obvious purposes. Heeding to their ‘request’ the officers were given separate building, besides the scheduled Examination Center, ie., University Arts College, much against the rules, with separate security staff and guards standing outside hall, not to invigilate the examinees but to alert them if invigilator arrives in. The invigilators and squad members were kept themselves ‘off’ from this special room as if it was an instruction. When a lecturer caught three of judges copying, other judges took the issue to the principal, who took an undertaking stating that they would not copy in next examinations. Judges knew that it was confession, but authorities left them without debarring from further examinations, while several other ordinary students in the center were facing strong actions for copying. One lecturer was threatened “don’t do any over action, go and ask your VC, we told him that it would be difficult for us to study for the course as we would be always busy with burden of cases”, the reporter added.

The news tips that the judges were copying from August 17, when examinations started, and they gave undertaking not to copy further, reached Andhra Jyoti, Warangal Branch. After thorough verification the reporters conducted a demo run around the hall and found it difficult to enter the special hall because of strong security, while judges had free for all situations inside. Next day the reporters gained their entry jumping a wall near the open ground from behind the building and appeared in the hall all of sudden, brushing aside the resistance from security guards in a fraction of second. Reporters in fact did ‘invigilation’ by stopping the judges from writing from text books, picked up their answer sheets and used handwritten notes etc., and then called the principal on cell phone along with the squad. As the media cameras have already captured incontrovertible evidence of malpractice by those who were supposed to punish the criminals, it was inevitable for the authorities to book the cases after taking the material papers concerning the malpractice, such books and slips used for copying along with answer sheets. They fulfilled all formalities like panchanama etc.

The reporters dared the threats from judicial officers and stay put themselves up to 5 O’ clock not to leave any scope for manipulations. Once their fate was sealed the media cameras left the hall to start beaming the video pictures of the judges copying leaving audience stunned. As he came to know the ghastly incident the Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh was furious and asked his office to procure the CDs and a report from the Examination in charge of the Kakatiya University Distance Education Center. With the cases already booked along with copying material, judges could not escape the axing action.

After five officers were suspended the Warangal District Bar wrote to Governor Narasimhan and Dean of Law, Justice L Narasimha Reddy (Judge AP High Court), explaining how Mr. Razzak and his wife Mrs. Prema Rajeswari, both the judicial officers, were also involved in the copying racket, they were also suspended. (http://expressbuzz.com/cities/hyderabad/hc-suspends-2-more-judges-for-copying/202094.html 29th August 2010)

”We were tense for two hours as the judges were threatening to jail us for contempt of court” Reporter said. He added that those who have quickly thrown out the copying material before camera focused on them tried to implicate cases on reporters for ‘trespass’ and ‘causing disturbance’ to the examinees. But after facing the surge of condemnation from TV viewers, and prompt suspension, they dared not, reporter said.

If a few of judicial officers’ malpractice caused a severe dent on the integrity of subordinate judiciary, the Chief Justice tried to rescue a little of its dignity by immediate action without leaving any scope for the ‘cover’ up by culprits. Media has telecast appreciation for this action. However, the Kakatiya University suffered a serious loss of credibility as this incident confirmed notoriety of its Distance Education program that it made post graduation degree a hassle free activity diluting the standards. Authorities could not explain the special arrangements made for judicial officers and other advocates with absolute lack of invigilation.

In Dayashankar v High Court of Allahabad, AIR 1987 SC 1469, the Supreme Court dealt with similar problem of malpractice by a judge and struck down all his petitions confirming the dismissal by full court of Allahabad High Court for misconduct. In this case District Judge Dayashankar was charged ‘you have lowered reputation of judiciary for honesty /integrity and you have exhibited an unworthy conduct wholly inconsistent with the dignity of office you occupied”. Disciplinary Committee of High Court held him guilty of misconduct and then the Full Court of Judges of Allahabad High Court in charge of administration of justice resolved to remove the guilty officer for copying in Jurisprudence paper of LL.M. examination held in Alighar University. His contention that some person disgruntled by his conviction order provoked his brother to plant a slip when he briefly left the examination hall for toilet was rejected as a concocted story. Yet, the officer resorted to all sorts of petitions, suits and writ petitions to some how secure some tenure keeping the orders in pendency. Supreme Court rejected all his contentions saying ‘undoubtedly the judiciary cannot have two standards, one in court and other outside the court. They have only one standard of rectitude and honesty. They cannot act even remotely unworthy of office they are occupying’.

Media’s camera, protest by Bar and prompt action by High Court saved the situation which otherwise would have been successfully wrapped up with connivance of sleeping invigilators and copycats. While some of the advocates demanded review of the judgments given by these tainted officers, students sought action against the university authorities for having two standards of invigilation, stricter against them and no action against the VIPs like judges.

Meanwhile the High Court Administrator’s action of canceling the increment incentives for judicial officers for acquiring higher degree in the wake of this scandal left the other officers, grumbling. They said “we did not copy, we are entitled to it, to cancel them in toto is injustice.”

Author:

– Prof. Madabhushi Sridhar,

Convener: Center for Media Law & Public Policy,

NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad