Justice Karnan is no more. He suffered a massive heart attack this morning, and his funeral will be held tomorrow at 11:00 AM at his native place.
As his friend and lawyer, I am deeply shocked by this sad news. Justice Karnan’s conviction for contempt of court—for scandalizing the court by raising allegations of corruption against his fellow judges—is one of the darkest days in the history of our justice delivery system.
That there is corruption in the judiciary is undeniable; it is a sad fact that nobody can deny. The question is whether a citizen has the right to raise their voice or concern about judicial corruption. And if someone does, should they face the fate that Karnan suffered? He was sentenced to imprisonment for six months and deprived of his position and function as a judge. Under our constitutional scheme, Parliament alone—through a motion of impeachment following an inquiry where misconduct is established—can remove a judge. Yet here, the Supreme Court usurped Parliament’s power of impeachment and removed Justice Karnan from office. Justice Karnan was due to retire anyway within six months of the initiation of the conduct proceedings; the Court could have waited for that to happen if it felt his continuance was an issue.
Now, the question is: what grave crime did Justice Karnan commit? He made allegations of corruption against fellow judges, along with certain other misconduct that I do not wish to elaborate on. When an allegation of corruption is made, there ought to be an investigation into the allegation. For instance, we had the case of Justice Verma, where currency notes went up in flames. Justice Verma claimed the money was planted by somebody else, while the public perception was that it was illegal money—which, for a judge, comes from selling justice—and it was alleged that the money belonged to a former Chief Justice who had brought him to Delhi. Those are all allegations. But in such a scenario, what ought to happen is an investigation by the police. Judges cannot investigate; judges can conduct an inquiry, conduct a trial, and pronounce a judgment, but all of that happens only after an investigation. An investigation can be conducted by the local police, the CBI, or a special agency constituted for that purpose, and nobody else.
All that Karnan wanted was an investigation. No investigation into the correctness of his allegations was ever made. On the contrary, contempt of court proceedings were initiated against him, and he engaged me to represent his cause. However, in the Supreme Court, I am not an Advocate-on-Record (AoR). Only an Advocate-on-Record can file a vakalatnama; other lawyers can appear only on the authority of an Advocate-on-Record, who can engage another lawyer to appear. So, I approached several Advocates-on-Record, but all refused, saying that here the prosecutor was the Court itself—the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice, and the seven judges—and nobody wanted to displease them or incur the displeasure of the Court. Advocates are under a duty to accept a brief when someone comes to court seeking representation; under the Bar Council rules, they cannot deny it. Yet, as many as twelve Advocates-on-Record whom I approached declined, saying it would affect their practice and displease the judges.
Then, I sought permission from the Chief Justice, Justice Khehar, to allow me to appear on Justice Karnan’s written authority, notarized, but it was not permitted. I filed a writ petition challenging the Contempt of Courts Act and questioning the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to deprive Justice Karnan of his judicial powers, a power enjoyed solely by Parliament. That writ petition—Criminal Diary Number 15420 of 2017—never saw the light of day. It was never listed because there was no Advocate-on-Record.
This happened to a sitting judge of the High Court. The question is: can a person be deprived of their liberty without due process of law? Justice Karnan was denied representation by a lawyer and was convicted without being afforded a due opportunity to be heard. Therefore, this was one of the greatest violations of fundamental rights and the principles of natural justice, and that too at the hands of a seven-judge Constitution Bench. I still expect the Court, at some point in time, to recall its order; my petition for recalling the order convicting and sentencing him is still pending.
Furthermore, it is not only the Court that is at fault. The government has the power to pardon, condone, or remit a sentence and release him from jail. I approached the President, the Prime Minister’s Office, the Home Minister, and the Law Minister, and I met the President’s Secretary. However, they hesitated because the order came from the Supreme Court, and obviously, the executive authorities were reluctant to intervene.
Justice Karnan sacrificed his office and went to jail for the cause of transparency and against corruption. His efforts shall not go in vain. It is the duty of one and all to ask for, demand, and seek the abolition of the concept of contempt of court by scandalization. People have a right to criticize and speak about corruption.

That is the homage we pay to the great soul, Jessy Kannan, who made the great sacrifice for the cause of transparency and against corruption.