Former Judges Slam Shah's Remarks on Opposition VP Nominee as Unfortunate, Prejudicial
The former judges, including seven retired Supreme Court justices, acknowledged that the vice-presidential campaign may be driven by ideology but stressed that it should be conducted with dignity and respect.
On Monday, a group of retired judges—including seven former Supreme Court justices—criticized Union Home Minister Amit Shah for what they called a “misinterpretation” of a landmark 2011 Supreme Court ruling that banned the Salwa Judum, a controversial anti-Naxal militia in Chhattisgarh. They described Shah’s comments as “unfortunate” and warned that such remarks from a senior political leader could undermine judicial independence.
Shah had made the remarks during a speech in Kerala on Friday, targeting B. Sudershan Reddy, the Opposition’s vice-presidential nominee and one of the two judges who delivered the 2011 verdict. Shah accused Reddy of aiding Maoist forces through the judgment and claimed that Left-Wing Extremism could have been eradicated by 2020 if the court hadn't ruled against the Salwa Judum.
“The Union Home Minister’s public misinterpretation of the Salwa Judum judgment is unfortunate,” the former judges said in a joint statement. “The verdict does not, in any way—either directly or indirectly—support Naxalism or its ideology.”
While acknowledging that political campaigns often involve ideological differences, the judges emphasized that such discourse should remain respectful and dignified. “Prejudicial misinterpretation of a Supreme Court ruling by a high-ranking official risks having a chilling effect on the judiciary,” they warned. “It could shake the confidence of judges and compromise the independence of the institution. For the sake of the dignity of the Vice President’s office, name-calling should be avoided.”
Among the signatories to the statement were former Supreme Court judges AK Patnaik, Abhay Oka, Gopala Gowda, Vikramjit Sen, Kurien Joseph, Madan B Lokur, and J Chelameswar.
Despite the criticism, Shah doubled down in a follow-up interview with news agency ANI. He reiterated that the Supreme Court’s judgment had rejected Salwa Judum and, in his view, stripped tribal communities of their right to self-defence. “Because of that ruling, Naxalism continued for over two decades. Back then, it was already on its last legs,” he said.
Shah also defended the role of Salwa Judum, saying it was a grassroots initiative by tribals to protect themselves. He claimed the court order forced security forces out of schools that had been repurposed as bases in Naxal-hit areas, leaving them vulnerable to attacks. “Rahul Gandhi should answer for these two judgments even more than Sudershan Reddy,” Shah said.