Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna while elaborating on the policy of demonetisation case in a recent address at the NALSAR University in Telangana said she thought ‘it was a good way of converting black money into white money’. She also said that the common man’s predicament during the demonetisation days stirred her, thus motivating her to dissent from the case.
“98% of the currency came back to the RBI. So where were we heading towards black money eradication? I thought it was a good way of converting black money into white money. What happened about income tax proceedings thereafter, we don”t know. So, therefore, the common man”s predicament really stirred me and hence I had to dissent,” she said.
In November 2016, the Union government declared in an executive order that the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 denomination notes at the time would stop being legal. Justice Nagarathna also stressed the lack of adequate communication and preparedness surrounding the demonetization decision.
In her address, she also commented on the frequent legal tussles between state governments and governors. “This is not a healthy trend under the constitution to bring what the governor does before constitutional courts for consideration. Though it is called a gubernatorial post, it is a serious constitutional post, and governors must act as per the constitution so this kind of litigation reduces,” she said.
Many state governments ruled by opposition parties have accused their governors who are appointed by the BJP-led Union government are acting in a partisan manner.
Justice Nagarathna also stressed the lack of adequate communication and preparedness surrounding the demonetization decision. She also said RBI had not applied an independent mind in canceling currency notes of Rs 500 and Rs 1000.