Bar, advocates back Justice AS Oka

Mumbai: The Bombay Bar Association (BBA) and Advocates Association of Western India (AAWI) on Monday convened extraordinary general meetings to condemn the state government’s allegation of bias against Justice A.S. Oka, a senior sitting judge of the Bombay high court. The advocates in their meetings condemned the state for resorting to such tactics and not acting responsibly and also for misleading the Chief Justice, based on which the case on noise pollution was transferred to another bench.

Though Chief Justice Manjula Chellur later restored the noise pollution matter to the original bench presided over by Justice Oka, the association however strongly condemned the action of the CJ in withdrawing part heard matter from a judge of this court on the “reckless, baseless and unwanted allegation of bias” against the judge concerned.

“A managing committee’s meeting was held on August 26, in which unanimously a resolution was passed condemning the state government for its act. Today that resolution was put before the special general body meeting and the resolution was anonymously confirmed,” said advocate Viresh Purwant, secretary of AAWI.

It may be recalled that the BBA, AAWI and Advocates Society for Minorities (ASM) have taken strong exception to the allegation made by the state government against Justice Oka that he harboured a serious bias against the state machinery in the noise pollution matter. The state had also complained against him to Chief Justice Manjula Chellur, who first transferred the matter from Justice Oka’s court but later formed a larger bench including Justices Oka, Anoop Mohta and Riyaz Chagla to hear this matter.

While standing staunchly in support of the judge, the advocates have demanded that the state withdraw the allegations. Though the state tendered an apology before Justice Oka on Monday, the court refused to accept it as it was not in the form of affidavit.

More than 300 members attended Monday’s BBA meeting.

The association also strongly condemned the action of the CJ. “In this background the House, further resolves that the referral of the two matters i.e. the public interest litigation and writ petition to a three-judge bench was also not warranted and urges the CJ to refer them to a division bench,” read the resolution.