Former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S Oka has responded to claims that the judiciary is a major impediment to India’s developmental ambitions, emphasizing the need for specific examples when levelling criticism. Justice Oka’s remarks came during the annual lecture organized by the Supreme Court Bar Association, where he reflected on governance, environmental protection, and the role of the courts in advancing public interest.

Without naming the individual directly, Justice Oka referred to Sanjeev Sanyal, a member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, who last month at the Nyaya Nirmaan 2025 conference argued that the judiciary had become “the single biggest hurdle” to India achieving the status of a developed nation. Sanyal had claimed that court orders often obstruct rapid economic growth and called for urgent judicial restructuring to facilitate India’s development over the next two decades.

Justice Oka underlined that while every citizen has the right to offer constructive criticism of the judiciary, such commentary should be grounded in concrete evidence. “If he had given particulars of those orders which, according to him, obstructed and hindered the Viksit Bharat plan, his criticism would have been constructive and most welcome. But this is no constructive criticism when you, in a single sentence, say that there are court orders which came in the way of Viksit Bharat,” he stated.

The former judge stressed the importance of specificity in critique, cautioning against blanket statements that undermine public trust in judicial institutions. He reiterated that a well-functioning judiciary is essential for upholding constitutional values and safeguarding citizens’ rights, even while balancing developmental goals.

Justice Oka, who retired from the Supreme Court on May 24 after nearly four years on the bench, has delivered close to 350 judgments spanning environmental protection, procedural fairness, and fundamental freedoms. Among his landmark rulings, he strengthened safeguards under stringent laws such as the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), often curbing investigative overreach by agencies like the Enforcement Directorate.

On environmental issues, Justice Oka’s judgments were transformative. He enforced a permanent ban on firecrackers in Delhi-NCR, directing preemptive application of the Graded Response Action Plan to curb pollution, and intervened in cases concerning industrial and vehicular emissions. His rulings consistently reflected a constitutional commitment to a clean environment as a fundamental right under Article 21.

During his lecture, Justice Oka elaborated on the constitutional and ethical obligations of citizens and the state in protecting the environment. He underscored that environmental stewardship is a fundamental duty enshrined in Article 51A of the Constitution and not merely a matter of personal or religious preference. “Every religion teaches compassion and respect for living beings. No religion permits environmental destruction,” he said, cautioning against the misuse of religious sentiment to justify practices that harm the environment.

Highlighting the recent Supreme Court relaxation of the firecracker ban for Diwali, Justice Oka remarked that the decision should be viewed in the context of public health and environmental impact. He stressed that no festival, including Diwali, confers the right to violate the rights of others or damage the environment. On the issue of noise pollution, he cited judicial precedents, including the Bombay High Court judgment on the Azaan, which determined that loudspeaker use is not an essential religious practice, a ruling later upheld by the Supreme Court.

Justice Oka also highlighted other environmental challenges, such as the immersion of plaster-of-Paris idols in water bodies. Recalling his tenure at the Bombay High Court, he noted how judicial orders previously allowed such practices despite guidelines from the Central Pollution Control Board, creating long-term ecological harm. While he welcomed municipal efforts to build artificial ponds for idol immersion, he acknowledged that public adoption of such alternatives remains slow.

The former judge further expressed concern over legislative changes diluting environmental enforcement. He noted that replacing criminal liability with monetary fines weakens deterrence and undermines public confidence. “In today’s scenario, the only institution that can truly protect the environment is the court. Judges must act without fear or favour, uninfluenced by religious or popular sentiment, and with complete fidelity to the Constitution—and to the planet we belong to,” he emphasized.

Justice Oka’s lecture intertwined reflections on environmental governance with a broader commentary on the role of the judiciary in shaping India’s developmental path. He stressed that constructive engagement, accountability, and adherence to constitutional principles are essential for harmonizing economic development with social and ecological justice.

By addressing the criticism of Sanyal, Justice Oka highlighted a fundamental principle: the judiciary cannot be held responsible for perceived delays or obstacles in achieving development without careful examination of context, rationale, and the specific legal provisions guiding its orders. Constructive criticism, he said, must be informed, precise, and respectful of the judiciary’s constitutional mandate.

In conclusion, Justice Oka called upon citizens, policymakers, and institutions to recognize the judiciary not as a barrier, but as a guardian of fundamental rights and a key participant in India’s journey toward becoming a “Viksit Bharat.” He stressed the interplay between development, environmental protection, and social justice, urging both government and citizens to uphold constitutional values while pursuing national progress.

The lecture served as both a critique of sweeping statements against the judiciary and a reaffirmation of the courts’ role in balancing development with constitutional obligations, environmental sustainability, and public welfare. Justice Oka’s reflections underscore the importance of reasoned dialogue, informed criticism, and a shared commitment to the principles of justice in shaping India’s future.