His straight drive is making headlines again. When Supreme Court Justice Dipankar Datta used a cricket analogy on Wednesday to question the 2023 law on the process for appointment of Election Commissioners, he was drawing on a game he still plays, with some brisk innings and big hits to his name.
Justice Dipankar Datta said that if the batting team gets to select the umpire, questions over neutrality would inevitably remain. He was hearing a case related to the 2023 law on how Election Commissioners are appointed.
Eggs have been thrown at TMC leaders aligned with Mamata Banerjee by protesters and BJP supporters ever since the TMC lost the Bengal polls in May. On Wednesday, he focused on the umpire; or in this case, the commissioners who referee elections in the world’s largest democracy. Like that straight drive in May when, on his way to a half-century against the Bombay High Court Senior Advocates’ team in Guwahati, he struck the ball so hard that the bowler suffered an injury trying to stop it. Justice Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma delivered a split opinion on whether challenges to a law governing the appointments of the Chief Election Commissioner and other Election Commissioners should go to a Constitution Bench. They eventually left that to the Chief Justice. Under the law, the selection committee comprises the Prime Minister and a minister nominated by the Prime Minister, besides the Leader of Opposition (Lok Sabha). The law replaced the CJI, who was placed on the panel by the court as a neutral party, with the nominated minister. Justice Datta also reacted sharply to the government lawyer’s assertion that judges appoint judges under the collegium system. He played in several tournaments in college, and there were occasions to choose between cricket and law practice. He chose law but kept playing, including for the Calcutta High Court Club, and continued after his elevation to the bench. Our freedom fighters took bullets on their chests.
“He should not have stuck his hand out at that shot,” he later said in the pavilion. In his opinion, Justice Datta said that if the batting team gets to select the umpire, questions about the umpire’s neutrality would inevitably remain. Even if the umpire gives the correct decision, there will always be a shadow of doubt over his impartiality, he said. Justice Datta said the minister is unlikely to disagree with the PM, which renders the LP’s role “ornamental” as the government would always have a 2-1 majority. He called that a “myth”, responding to the lawyer. His interest in cricket dates back to his childhood, sources close to him told NDTV.
His remarks from the bench drew attention recently also when, hearing Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra’s plea to appear virtually before the West Bengal Police, Justice Datta asked, “Are you afraid of eggs?
