Outgoing Chief Justice of India Sathasivam lobbies for post-retirement job - is this not highly unethical and in bad taste

According to a news report: 

"Outgoing Chief Justice of India P Sathasivam does not mind being the first Lokpal or taking up any other post-retirement job if the decision is taken unanimously and without controversy.

"If it (being made Lokpal) is a unanimous choice, then definitely I will accept it," he told PTI.

Justice Sathasivam, who is demitting office tomorrow after nine months as the head of the judiciary, said he was not averse to accepting any position after his retirement like NHRC Chief or Lokpal but that has to be without any controversy and it should be "befitting" for an ex-CJI." 

Read at http://www.financialexpress.com/news/cji-ready-to-be-lokpal-if-decision-is-unanimous-cji-sathasivam/1244030

Is not the Supreme Court of India violating Subrata Roy's constitutionally guaranteed right to liberty by keeping him in judicial custody until he repays money due by his firms to creditors?

Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law". 

The Supreme Court of India is not following the procedure established by law to recover money from Sahara companies. 

They should first convict Subrata Roy, find him guilty of fraud and personally liable for his companies' dues. Then they should seize all his and Sahara's assets (including benami assets) and auction them. 

Taking away a person's liberty is not a recovery method (for moneys due) prescribed under Indian law.  

Delhi High Court Judges S. Muralidhar and Mukta Gupta choose the wrong case to start exploring whether pedophile who raped and murdered 3 year old girl can be reformed

The Business Standard reports: 

'Examine probability of reforming toddler's murderer'

IANS  |  New Delhi   April 18, 2014 Last Updated at 20:44 IST

The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi government to examine whether there is any probability of reforming and rehabilitating a farmhouse guard who had raped and killed a three-year-old girl.

The high court Thursday upheld the life sentence awarded by a trial court to the 56-year-old guard.

The trial court had last July awarded the death sentence to guard Bharat Singh for killing the child and a concurrent life term for raping her. The victim died while she was being raped as her internal organs had come out.

A special bench of Justice S. Muralidhar and Justice Mukta Gupta directed the home department of the Delhi government to appoint a Probation Officer (PO) to examine the chances of his reformation after which the court will decide on the death sentence.

The court Thursday asked the government to file the report in a sealed cover within 10 weeks and posted the matter for July 11.

The girl April 10, 2011 was returning to her house in Kapashera in southwest Delhi when she strayed towards the farmhouse. The girl was called inside by Bharat Singh, who was alone on duty, and was raped by him, the prosecution had said.

The high court asked the government to examine the probability of whether the accused would commit criminal acts of violence or would constitute a continuing threat to society and probability of his reformation and rehabilitation.

It asked the PO to enquire about his conduct in prison from the jail administration and also ask from his family and locals regarding his behavioural traits.

It also asked the PO to consult and seek specific inputs from two professionals in the fields of clinical psychology and sociology.