The petitions opposing the appointment of attorney Lakshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri as a judge of the Madras High Court were dismissed by the Supreme Court. the ruling of the supreme court following Gowri's oath of office as a Madras High Court judge.
The case was heard by a bench presided over by Chief Justice of India (CJI), DY Chandrachud. Earlier, the case was scheduled to be heard by a panel of judges Sanjeev Khanna and MM Sundresh.
The hearing took place on the day when Lakshmana was supposed to take his oath of office as a new judge. She and four other people were appointed. Her appointment was announced by the Union government as a result of a recommendation by the highest court collegium.
A group of 21 Madras High Court attorneys opposed Victoria Gowri's elevation to the position of judge, and they urged President Droupadi Murmu to reject the Supreme Court Collegium's recommendation that Lakshmana is appointed as a judge of the high court.
The attorneys mentioned instances in which Lakshmana could be seen making disparaging statements about communities of colour. Her "deep-rooted religious prejudice" and "regressive attitudes," in the words of the attorneys, make her "unfit to be considered as judge of the High Court." They used an RSS interview from 2018 where Lakshmana called Christianity "white horror" and went on a similar "distasteful diatribe" against Christians.
The Collegium's suggestion to select someone who is vocal about her contempt for minority communities will definitely harm the public's perception of the judiciary's objectivity. If Ms. Lakshmana is appointed as a judge, can any litigant from the Muslim or Christian community possibly expect to receive justice in her court? ask the attorneys.
After two years, whenever the Supreme Court collegium would evaluate her overall competence and appropriateness, Lakshmana will come up for certification as a permanent judge. She has been cleared to serve as an additional judge on the top court.
