Making people happy not job of judge: Outgoing Justice Hemant Gupta

Justice Gupta was speaking at a felicitation programme organised by the Supreme Court Bar Association on his last working day as an apex court judge.

“A judge cannot make people happy, that’s not the role assigned to him. That role is assigned to other people in public life. One cannot discharge this role with intention of pleasing people,” he said.

He said he was harsh and blunt in court, “but whatever orders were warranted as per my understanding were passed”.

“Most important is my inner satisfaction that I have given the best to the institution. I have no regrets. I have tried my best to discharge my duties with utmost humility and sincerity, though sometimes I lose my cool. No one is perfect. I cannot stake any claim to perfection. In my shortcomings, when I erred, it’s been unintentional,” he said, adding “I am retiring with a lot of contentment in my heart.”

Chief Justice of India (CJI) Uday Umesh Lalit termed Justice Gupta as a “great asset” to the institution.

He is a man “who has the capacity to go into everything to make the best of whatever is presented before him”, the CJI said.

He also praised Justice Gupta for being “completely digitised”.

“No wonder his court has always encouraged going paperless. He was associated with legal aid work. Whatever he has done, he’s done it to the best of his ability,” the CJI said.

The CJI praised Justice Gupta also for his efficiency in delivering judgment.

“Whatever he has done, any judgment would be ready in two weeks’ time. He’s a man who would find time to write judgements immediately,” he said.

Justice Gupta, who had his last working day as the apex court judge on Friday, expressed his satisfaction regarding his work, and said whatever role was assigned to him, he performed to best of his abilities, and without fear or favour. “Whatever matter has come before me, I have not shied away from deciding, whatever may be the subject.”

Justice Gupta was elevated as an apex court judge on November 2, 2018.

The retirement of Justice Gupta would bring down the number of serving judges in the top court to 28 against the sanctioned strength of 34 including the CJI.

During his tenure as a judge of the apex court, Justice Gupta delivered several important judgements, including the verdict in the Karnataka Hijab ban matter.

In the split verdict in the Hijab matter, Justice Gupta had dismissed the appeals challenging the March 15 judgement of the Karnataka High Court which had refused to lift the ban.

Earlier during the day, Justice Gupta sat with the CJI to hear the matters, where CJI Lalit said, “I must say something. Today, in this combination, we are the two senior-most judges in terms of age here in this court.”

CJI Lalit is due to retire on November 8.

Justice Gupta, son of former Chief Justice of the Punjab and Hayana High Court Jitender Vir Gupta, was born on October 17, 1957, and was enrolled as an advocate in July 1980. He also worked as additional advocate general of Punjab from 1997 to 1999.

He was appointed a judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on July 2, 2002.

Justice Gupta was a member of the Computer Committee of the Punjab and Haryana High Court for more than 10 years and this period saw a complete computerisation of the high court including digitisation of the entire records of judicial files and developing a mechanism to scan the freshly filed case, introduction of the case management system, launching of an e-diary etc.

He took over as a judge of the Patna High Court on February 8, 2016 and was appointed as the acting Chief Justice of that high court on October 29, 2016.

Justice Gupta was appointed as Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court on March 18, 2017.

During his tenure as a judge in the apex court, he was part of a five-judge Constitution bench, which in a significant judgement had refused to refer to a larger bench to revisit its 29-year-old Mandal verdict putting cap on quotas at 50 per cent, as it quashed a Maharashtra law granting reservations to Marathas in admissions and government jobs in the state, saying it violated the principle of right to equality.

Justice Gupta was also a part of the bench which had said that insulting remarks made to a person belonging to Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes within four walls of the house with no witnesses does not amount to offence, as it quashed the charges under the SC/ST Act against a man who had allegedly abused a woman within her building.