30 May 2023 : The Hindu Editorial Analysis

Editorial 1 : Faster, stronger: on India and its supercomputer use

Context

Later this year, India will have a new ‘supercomputer’ or, more correctly, an upgraded ‘high performance computing (HPC)’ system that will arguably be its fastest.

About HPC System:

• This system is to be made and installed by the French corporation, Atos — an information technology service and consulting company. The central government signed a deal in 2018 with France to procure high-performance computers worth ₹4,500 crore by 2025.
• These HPC systems will run at two institutions, the Indian Institute of Tropical Meteorology, Pune, and the National Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasting, Noida, that currently host two of India’s most powerful such machines, Mihir and Pratyush.

Uses of HPCs:

• Like their predecessors, the Atos machines will be used primarily to run sophisticated weather models that, for some years now, are being used to prepare a range of forecasts, from long-term monsoon to fortnightly as well as daily weather changes.
• Extremely powerful machines are needed for this purpose as accurate forecasts are premised on being able to simulate the state of the atmosphere and oceans.
• While many challenging research questions, apart from weather modelling, are extremely dependent on computing — protein biology, aerospace-modelling applications, and now AI-linked applications — the possession of HPCs is also used as a medallion by countries wanting to signify their technological prowess.

The Top500 project

• It is a project that has for over two decades maintained a list of the top 500 most powerful HPC machines and this is updated twice a year.
• Currently, a machine housed at Pune’s Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC) is the only Indian machine in the top 100 with a top speed of 13 petaflops. (Floating point operations per second (FLOPS) are an indicator of computer processing abilities and 1 petaflop is a 1,000 trillion flops. )
• The to-be installed French machines are expected to be 18 petaflops and India already has a handful of machines at multiple research institutions in the petaflop range.
• The possession of powerful supercomputers is certainly a reassurance that Indian scientists, wanting to solve intractable problems, can always tap these behemoths, but whether the use of these machines has translated into significant breakthroughs in fundamental science or engineering commercial products is another matter.

Conclusion:

Much like India has improved its short-term weather forecasts and made cyclone forecasts more accurate on the back of such machines, there should be greater accounting of their worth in other fields, rather than be content with epithets of speed and power.

Editorial 2 : From Master of the Roster to Master of all Judges?

Context:

Recently, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court, in Ritu Chhabria v. Union of India, affirmed an undertrial’s right to be released on default bail in the event of the investigation remaining incomplete and proceeding beyond the statutory time limit.

An extraordinary decision

• It frowned upon the practice of investigative agencies charge sheeting an accused despite the investigation being unfinished. It held that the right to be released on bail will not be extinguished on the mere filing of preliminary charge sheet.
• It concluded that an accused’s right to seek default bail would be terminated only upon completion of the investigation within the statutory time limit.
• Subsequently, in a surprising turn of events, the Court of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) entertained a recall application moved by the Union of India against this judgment. It then passed an interim order directing courts to decide bail applications without relying on the decision laid down in Ritu Chhabria for a short period of time.
• In a nutshell, by stripping the decision of the Division Bench of its precedential value even if for a short while, the Court of the CJI indirectly stayed the decision despite not having any connection with the verdict.
• Ordinarily, the only recourse available to the Union of India was the filing of a review petition, which is usually decided by the same Bench. There was no scope of the review petition being entertained by the Court of the CJI.
• The only way the Court of the CJI could enter the fray would be if there was another Coordinate Bench seized of the same issue in a separate matter, expressing its disagreement with the ratio laid in Ritu Chhabriaand referring it to the CJI for recommendation to a larger Bench.

Forum shopping

• There was no scope for a recall application being filed against a judgment, that too before an altogether different Bench. Doing so is tantamount to bench fishing or forum shopping.
• Therefore, by entertaining an intra court appeal within the Supreme Court as an additional mechanism against an order passed by a Bench that did not include the CJI, the Court of the CJI has effectively instituted a mechanism that is completely devoid of any legislative or constitutional backing.

First amongst equals

• Within the constitutional scheme of things, all judges of the Supreme Court are equal in terms of their judicial powers. However, the CJI enjoys special administrative powers such as constituting Benches and assigning matters and references for reconsideration of a larger Bench.
• The CJI is known as the ‘Master of the Roster.’ This is why he is regarded as ‘first amongst equals’ in relation to companion judges. But in any given Bench including the CJI, the vote or power given to the CJI is the same as that given to his companion judges.
• History is replete with examples of the CJI authoring a minority opinion of the Court. The most recent such order was the one passed by the Supreme Court in the Economic Weaker Sections quota dispute where the then CJI, Justice U.U. Lalit, along with Justice S. Ravindra Bhat authored the minority opinion of the Court.

Cause for concern

• In India, the legitimacy of the power of Master of the Roster has been hotly debated, and has been, from time to time, reaffirmed to the extent of administrative decisions for the smooth functioning of the Court. By no stretch of imagination does the present order of the CJI fall within the powers envisaged under the ‘Master of the Roster’ system.
• Despite the administrative usefulness of the ‘Master of the Roster’ system, the many recorded instances of abuse are a cause for concern. Just five years ago, four senior judges of the Supreme Court alleged serious infirmities and irregularities in the administration and assigning of cases for hearing to Benches of the Court.
• The CJI’s powers as the Master of the Roster are meant only for administrative decision making. The order has the effect of enlarging the powers of the CJI on the judicial side and of creating an unprecedented intra court appellate mechanism within the Supreme Court in total disregard of the established procedure, which is a review petition. The instant order has also dulled the bright line prohibiting the Court of the CJI from assuming that it is superior to all other Benches.

Way forward:

• The powers vested in the CJI by his virtue of being the Master of the Roster are unending. It is impractical to lay any limits on these powers, meant for the smooth administrative functioning of the Court.
• It is imperative that the CJI himself refrains from expanding his powers as Master of the Roster; the practice of constituting Benches and allocating cases should be completely computerised and left out of the hands of the CJI.

  ---