Again economic policy decisions are not set aside because they appear to be unwise unless they are utterly irrational or arbitrary. Judicial restraint however should not be an alibi for self-abnegation of judicial power. Judicial review, if it is exercised with the requisite restraint, cannot impair the constitutional balance among the three organs of the State.

Judicial restraint is also necessary when making off-the-cuff observations from the Bench indiscriminately condemning certain sections of the society, like landlords, the business community or bureaucrats, and branding them as cheats and corrupt. The media is likely to blow up such observations for sensationalism. Besides justifiable apprehensions could be raised in the minds of the concerned litigants about their right to unbiased independent justice, which may occasion applications for recusal of the particular judge when dealing with their cases. All this can be avoided if judges who rightly preach judicial restraint practise it in their judicial utterances.

• Overpowering Sleep: A news channel recently caught some MPs napping during the President’s address in Parliament. People were upset about what was perceived as disrespect to the Head of the State. Let us not overreact. Sleep, ‘‘a gentle thing, beloved from pole to pole’’, overtakes even high dignitaries when they should be wide awake. Former prime minister H D Deve Gowda often yielded to sleep during important meetings. President Ronald Regan had a few winks during his audience with the late Pope John Paul. Judges sleeping on the Bench is not an uncommon spectacle. In my law college days I along with some students would bunk a boring lecture at the Government Law College Bombay and cross over to the Bombay High Court. On one such occasion, lo and behold, I saw Justice Bhagwati in deep slumber during the hearing of an appeal. In my youthful enthusiasm to ensure effective administration of justice I deliberately knocked down one of those heavy chairs in the court room to wake up his lordship. As a result of the bang the learned judge opened his eyes, looked around for a few moments—I was terrified—and then reverted to his blissful state. Former justices A N Sen and Sagir Ahmad regularly enjoyed their quota of post-lunch slumber.

We should not grudge our judges a little sleep on the Bench. Remember that some of them start reading the stack of papers and go through the files from four in the morning. Eminent judges in England are also not immune from the sleep syndrome. Justice Finlay, when his court resumed after lunch, used to walk up and down the bench behind his chair because he was afraid of going to sleep. Justice Beaman of the Bombay High Court warded off sleep in similar fashion. Going through David Pannick’s delightful book Judges, I found a precedent for my youthful prank. Pannick recounts that Justice Cave regularly had an afternoon snooze at work and to wake him up, ‘‘flippant young barristers dropped heavy volumes on the floor or banged the flaps of the seat’’. Apparently naughty minds think alike.

The matter was aptly summed up by one Law Lord who said he did not mind his fellow Law Lords sleeping during the hearing of a case but objected to their snoring and disturbing the sleep of the other Law Lords. But the catch is, as Mark Twain points out, ‘‘there ain’t no way to find out why a snorer can’t hear himself snore’’. Fortunately no MP was found snoring during the Presidential address, thus obviating far-reaching constitutional issues like whether snoring would tantamount to contempt of the House.