The CJI was responding during a hearing on a PIL filed by Ashwani Kumar complaining that India, which had signed on the UN Convention against Torture way back in 1997, has still not ratified the Convention which defines torture as a criminal offence

"We are always angry. Our anger has no meaning because we are always angry," Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi reacted to a remark by former law minister Ashwini Kumar that the court should not be "upset".

The interaction between the CJI and Mr. Kumar came on a PIL plea filed by the latter in his personal capacity. Mr. Kumar has complained that India, which had signed on the UN Convention against Torture way back in 1997, has still not ratified the Convention, which defines torture as a criminal offence.

The Bench, also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjeev Khanna, tried to explain that the Supreme Court cannot direct Parliament under Article 142 of the Constitution as "Parliament is sovereign in its sphere and the Supreme Court is sovereign in its own sphere".

The Chief Justice said the court cannot issue a writ to the Government of India to "honour its constitutional promise to preserve human dignity."

"How will we look in the eyes of the world if we do something like that" the Chief Justice asked Mr. Kumar.

The CJI asked Mr. Kumar to point out what specific directions he has asked for from the court to fill up the vacuum allegedly caused by lack of a parliamentary law on custodial torture.

Mr. Kumar then complained that he has never been properly heard in the case. This apparently riled the CJI, who said that the Bench would hear Mr. Kumar's case and no other listed for the day.

"It is very easy for you to talk from the other side. How many cases do we hear everyday and how is our time rationed. You may not know," the CJI addressed Mr. Kumar.

Mr. Kumar said he was not talking about any other court but this court. He said he had no intention to upset the court.

"Now that a grievance has been made by a senior person [Mr. Kumar] that he has not been heard, we will hear him in detail," the CJI said, asking Mr. Kumar to begin his submissions in the PIL.

Earlier in the hearing, the Centre handed over an affidavit in the court, providing the status of its efforts with the States to finalise a law to prevent custodial torture and inhuman treatment.

"There is no use blaming this government or the other. We are cooperating. Doing our best," Attorney General K.K. Venugopal submitted.

The government was countering submissions by Mr. Kumar that no steps were taken to implement the Prevention of Torture Bill 2010 even six years after it was passed by the Lok Sabha on May 6, 2010 and recommended by a Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha of which he had been the Chairman.

Mr. Kumar had argued that the Centre avoided an independent legislation on torture, saying that some States were not in favour of such a law and the Indian Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code were more than sufficient.