Times of India has reported that the Government of India is not likely to accept the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India H.L. Dattu for appointing Justice Gyan Sudha Misra, a former judge of the Supreme Court, as Chairperson of the appellate tribunal dealing with cases under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (SAFEMA). It is reported that the Government is likely to return this recommendation to the Chief Justice and request for recommending a fresh name. This appellate tribunal is known as the “Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property” consisting of a Chairman and other members (being officers of the Central Government not below the rank of a Joint Secretary to the Government). As per Section 12(2) of the SAFEMA Act, the Chairman (or chairperson) of the Appellate Tribunal shall be a person who is or has been or is qualified to be a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court.
It is noteworthy that recently, during the hearing of writ petitions challenging the validity of the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) before the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court headed by Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, the Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi appearing on behalf of Union of India had given the names of certain judges in a sealed cover who were supposed to be examples of bad appointments of judges by the Collegium system. It is widely reported that the name of retired Supreme Court judge, Justice Gyan Sudha Misra was amongst one of those names in view of the fact that the AG had openly referred to a judge who had the habit of coming late, and this reference was meant to be to Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra. It is well known in legal circles in Delhi that she had the habit of coming late to court almost on a daily basis making lawyers wait, and sometimes she would be late for more than an hour. Times of India has reported that in view of this reason, the Central Government has no option but to disagree with the CJI’s recommendation as it has gone public with this view. Accordingly, the government is likely to request the CJI to suggest another retired judge’s name for the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property.
At the time of her retirement as a Supreme Court judge, in a farewell function organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) on 25 April 2014, Justice Misra had herself said that: “For me, the greatest villain was the clock”.
It may be pointed out that the Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (SAFEMA) is an Act to provide for the forfeiture of illegally acquired properties of smugglers and foreign exchange manipulators and for matters connected therewith. This Act was enacted for the effective prevention of smuggling activities and as a deterrent for the foreign exchange manipulations which are having a deleterious effect on the national economy, since it was felt necessary to deprive person engaged in such activities and manipulations of their ill-gotten gains, and who have been augmenting such gains by violations of wealth tax, income tax or other laws or by other means and have thereby been increasing their resources for operating in a clandestine manner. Such persons have in many cases been holding the properties acquired by them through such gains in the names of their relatives, associates and confidants. This Act was enacted to deal with such illegally acquired properties. The above appellate tribunal deals with appeals under this Act.
