The bench of the ceremony was sitting for about one and a half hours – a rareness in the Supreme Court.
“Only Judge I can think about whom such a affectionate farewell was about, it was Justice LN Rao and Purv-CJI UU Lalit,” said a senior advocate on the condition of anonymity. “They, for a long time, practiced on the bench in the Supreme Court before their height. So, it was actually an emotional moment to see them in court for the last time.”
But Justice Oka’s farewell was different.
The lawyer said, “For a judge, who spent more than three years in the apex court, the sand-off was a deep reflection of his judicial heritage, which was made to the body’s body in such a short period and his commitment to the protection of personal freedom,” said the lawyer.
“Char ‘I was associated with a judge, clearly, appeared in you,” Senior Advocate S. Guru Krishnamurthy told Justice Oka during the farewell. “Wisdom, integrity, freedom and industry,” he said.
The retired judge praised his presence in court despite suffering from a personal tragedy.
Justice Oka lost his mother on Wednesday evening and left for Thane, where his last rites were performed on Thursday morning, but he returned to Delhi the same evening. He also organized the court on Friday morning, gave 11 decisions reserved by his bench for a long time.
Following the announcements, Justice Oka included CJI Gawai and Justice Augustine Maasih in the Ceremonial Bench, which, according to the customary rituals, was seated for the retired judge’s farewell.
However, this was not the first time that Justice Oka preferred official work on personal loss. CJI Gawai recalled how Justice Oka, as a judge of the Bombay High Court, did not take leave even when her father was lost.
The CJI told a packed courtroom during the farewell ceremony, “I remember all the colleagues that they should go to the chamber to give their condolences to go home.” CJI Gawai and Justice Oka were an ally in the Bombay High Court.
“Patron of personal freedom”. “A firm Judge”. “Humility personality”. In this way Bar described Justice Oka.
Justice Oka, Famous Advocate Surenivas W. Oka’s son, graduated in science to become an engineer. He later studied the law, and on 28 June 1983, he enrolled as an advocate, began his practice in Thane district court.
Justice Oka first joined his father and then the Chamber of Justice VP Tipinis, who was a former judge of the Bombay High Court, who also served as Lokayukta in Maharashtra.
On 15 February 2003, Justice Oka’s name was recommended for height, but his warrant for appointment came after six months. In 2019, Justice Oka became the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court in August 2021 before its height.
“My name was absent from newspapers … It came as a shock that I was going to be elevated,” he said during another farewell, a formal ceremony organized by the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA). The meeting on Friday evening included the chief lawyers of the Supreme Court – again, an important opportunity for a judge on the last working day.
Despite his reputation as a strict and non-resident judge, Justice Oka respected and praised the legal community. This was because “he never lost the ability to do justice”, said senior advocate Anita Shenoy.
His tenure was marked with the decision, not only to post the constitutional principles of freedom, fraternity and equality but also posted his application in matters fixed by him.
To some extent, the prevention of the Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the prevention of comprehensive powers contained in the Enforcement Directorate, to some extent, their brief but important orders in the anti-mani laundering case were diluted.
Also read: Once gone ‘cold’- no farewell for Justice Bella Trivedi, strong rebuke from CJI
Heritage of justice oka
His decision in 2024 created conditions for a small but meaningful investigation on the ED’s powers. In the Directorate of Enforcement, a bench led by Justice Oka, a Justice Oka, asked to underline the basic principles of criminal jurisprudence that a particular PMLA court near the ED has not given the power to arrest a person after taking cognizance of its case, indicating the investigation of the agency after filing a complaint. The ED’s complaint is similar to a charge sheet filed by the police under the General Penal Act.
The bench insisted that ED custody is mainly for examination, not to punish an undertritry. The argument behind this decision was clear – the investigation agencies arrested the suspects for assisting in the investigation process. However, if a complaint exists, it indicates that the agency did not need a person’s custody. There may be no point in getting custody after the conclusion of the investigation.
The decision also added another layer of security for a PMLA suspect – the accused in the case has issued warrants against him due to their failure in appearing before the court, they do not need to apply for bail under special law, but can apply to cancel the warrant under the Criminal Procedure Code, a relatively simple procedure.
Another of his decision strengthened the rights of an accused for a fair test. A bench of Justice Oka ruled that the ED was obliged to list all the documents and materials collected during its investigation, in which its complaint was not trusted by the agency, and handing the list to the accused. This direction came under the background of difficulties in getting bail under PMLA, which puts a reverse burden on the accused to prove his innocence in a money laundering case.
Keeping all the documents will help the accused the frame to his defense – even for bail purposes – because those documents can have evidence of a stimulating nature, due to which the agency cannot use them, his bench saw.
If not in writing, his comments also changed their mark orally. Justice Oka never made words, decomposing the investigating agencies to violate judicial security measures or the fixed process of law.
On several occasions, he overshadowed the ED for “punished” citizens by mourning the “process of punishment” in the PMLA cases, mourning them in custody.
“You (Ed) are really punished [the] The person kept him in custody, “he told Ed during the hearing of the Citizen Apurthy Nigam scam.
He slammed the agency earlier this year to suppress important information and use the PMLA to keep a former product officer, asking if the PMLA is being “misused” like a dowry law.
Justice Oka always defended free speech rights, which he saw as an essential feature of the Constitution. Rejecting a sedation case file in Maharashtra, he noticed that the “right to rights” guaranteed by the Constitution and legally “is an integral part of rights”. The FIR against the accused came after criticizing the cancellation of Article 370, in addition to Pakistan’s wish on his Independence Day.
Before his retirement, Justice Oka, sitting with Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, granted bail on the popular front of former Secretary General of India, accused in the murder of the RSS worker. He saw that having a separate ideology is not a crime.
“This is the trend we find. This is because they have adopted a particular ideology [that they ended up in jail]”He asked the lawyer of the prosecution agency NIA.
Justice Oka’s sensitivity was not limited to humans only. He was equally kind on environmental matters, and his orders ensured that the authorities took appropriate measures to prevent irreparable damage to the ecology. Until its last day in court, he heard cases related to air pollution in Delhi and NCR. His regular monitoring of the case gave rise to several orders, which made the civil agencies and the state governments mandatory to carry forward practical remedies to improve the AQI levels in the capital.
In another judgment, a bench led by Justice Oka gave a major blow to the central government. No post-facto environmental approval For development projects, two central government’s information for such approval stopped the mechanism for future projects. However, the order left the project approval unchanged so far.
The bench stated that the environmental withdrawal began after operations on the project that damaged public health, opposite to Article 21 of the Constitution, which promises freedom and life rights. These declared rights included a guarantee of pollution-free environment.
Sympathy for grassroots realities, a bench of Justice Oka on Friday exercised its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, to give a repetition to a POCSO convict. The judge called the case an eye -opening for all. The case was involved in a minor girl who fell in love with an adult person, she married her and had a child. On their behalf, the girl fought with her parents, who then filed a POCSO case against the man.
It was numbered by the teacher of Justice Oka’s girl that “due to the shortcomings, legal systems and her family in our society, the girl suffered and could not create an informed option in the first phase of life. He did not consider the incident as a heinous crime, so sentenced the person who “disturbed” the bench, visited Justice Oka. After convicting the man, the bench ordered his release under Article 142.
The presence of Justice Oka in the court strengthened public belief in the institution, senior advocate and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) Vice President Rachana Srivastava. During the proceedings of the formal bench, he appreciated him for his judicial humility and to implement the law to uplift and empower citizens and institutions.
Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, who had several times caught fire from Justice Oka, expressed the continuous efforts of the retired judge to discipline the bar. Publicly apologized for harassing the judge, he said, “I know it was my fault, and I have learned a lot from my Lordship.”
As Srivastava said, the legacy of Justice Oka will be debated and will be discussed in the SC corridors in his absence.
(Edited by Madhurita Goswami)